Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35187867›Full record

Trial reportJournal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle2022

Effects of resistance training intensity on muscle quantity/quality in middle-aged and older people: a randomized controlled trial.

Yuta Otsuka, Yosuke Yamada, Akifumi Maeda, Takayuki Izumo, Tomohiro Rogi, Hiroshi Shibata, Masahiro Fukuda, Takuma Arimitsu, Naokazu Miyamoto, Takeshi Hashimoto

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
9.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

51 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Yuta OtsukaInstitute for Health Care Science, Suntory Wellness Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2482-2802
Yosuke YamadaNational Institute of Health and Nutrition, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Akifumi MaedaSuntory Global Innovation Center Ltd., Research Institute, Kyoto, Japan.
Takayuki IzumoInstitute for Health Care Science, Suntory Wellness Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
Tomohiro RogiInstitute for Health Care Science, Suntory Wellness Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
Hiroshi ShibataInstitute for Health Care Science, Suntory Wellness Ltd., Kyoto, Japan.
Masahiro FukudaFukuda Clinic, Osaka, Japan.
Takuma ArimitsuFaculty of Sport and Health Science, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan.
Naokazu MiyamotoGraduate School of Health and Sports Science, Juntendo University, Chiba, Japan.
Takeshi HashimotoFaculty of Sport and Health Science, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan.
Suntory (Japan) · JPRitsumeikan University · JPFutaba clinic · JPJuntendo University · JPNational Institute of Infectious Diseases · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA sarcopenia diagnosis is confirmed by the presence of low muscle quantity or quality under the 2018 revised definition by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2. Imaging methods [i.e. magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)], dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and bioelectrical impedance analysis are tools to evaluate muscle quantity or quality. The present study aimed to investigate whether and how low-intensity and moderate-intensity resistance training improved both muscle quantity and quality measured by MRI, DXA, and segmental bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy (S-BIS) in middle-aged and older people.

methodsA single-blind, randomized, controlled trial was conducted. Community-dwelling people aged 50-79 years were randomly allocated to no exercise (no-Ex), low-intensity exercise (low-Ex), and moderate-intensity exercise (moderate-Ex) groups. Participants in the exercise groups performed resistance training for 24 weeks, with loads of 40% and 60% of one repetition maximum in the low-Ex and moderate-Ex groups, respectively. Cross-sectional area (CSA), lean mass, and muscle electrical properties on S-BIS were used to determine the effects of training interventions on muscle quantity and quality of the lower limbs.

resultsFifty participants (no-Ex 17, age 63.5 ± 8.5 years, women 47.1%; low-Ex 16, age 63.6 ± 8.1 years, women 50.0%; moderate-Ex 17, age 63.5 ± 8.3 years, women 52.9%) completed the 24 week exercise intervention. For the primary outcome, significant intervention effects were found in thigh muscle CSA on MRI between the moderate-Ex and no-Ex groups (+6.8 cm

conclusionsResistance exercise with moderate intensity improved muscle quantity and quality measured by MRI and S-BIS, whereas that with low intensity only increased muscle quantity in middle-aged and older people. The comparisons among the responses to exercise between the assessment methods indicate the greater value of MRI and S-BIS to measure changes of muscle quantity and quality than of lean mass measured by DXA for assessing the local effects of resistance training.

Indexed as

Resistance TrainingSarcopeniaAgedFemaleHumansMiddle AgedMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthSingle-Blind MethodDual-energy X-ray absorptiometryMagnetic resonance imagingResistance exerciseSegmental bioelectrical impedance spectroscopy

Identifiers

PMID35187867
PMCPMC8977953
OpenAlexW4212880910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.