SynthesisJournal of sports science & medicine2022
Internal Validity in Resistance Training Research: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Resistance training prescription for muscle strength and hypertrophy in healthy adults: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.British journal of sports medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of the active break intervention on nonspecific low back pain among young people: a randomized controlled trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Trial
- American College of Sports Medicine Position Stand. Resistance Training Prescription for Muscle Function, Hypertrophy, and Physical Performance in Healthy Adults: An Overview of Reviews.Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 2026 · on this mapReview
- Enhancing Neuromuscular Conditioning in Football Players Through Single-Leg and Double-Leg Cycling: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Translational sports medicine · 2026Article
- Editorial: Insights in rehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions 2023/2024.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Article
- A Randomized Controlled Trial of Active Stretching of the Hamstrings and Core Control for Low Back Pain and Musculoskeletal Discomfort during Prolonged Sitting among Young People.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- An Eight-Week Randomized Controlled Trial of Active Mobilization of the Hamstrings for Non-Specific Low Back Pain and Musculoskeletal Discomfort during Prolonged Sitting among Young People: Study Protocol.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- The Effects of Resistance Training on Sport-Specific Performance of Elite Athletes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Journal of human kinetics · 2024Review
- The learning of sprint hurdles: A comparative study on increasing contextual interference and blocked practice schedules.PloS one · 2024Article
- Short-Term Effects of Lower-Extremity Heavy Resistance versus High-Impact Plyometric Training on Neuromuscular Functional Performance of Professional Soccer Players.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ensuring internal validity is the key procedure when planning the study design. Numerous systematic reviews have demonstrated that considerations for internal validity do not receive adequate attention in the primary research in sport sciences. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to review methodological procedures in current literature where the effects of resistance training on strength, speed, and endurance performance in athletes were analyzed. A computer-based literature searches of SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Medline, and Web of Science was conducted. The internal validity of individual studies was assessed using the PEDro scale. Peer-reviewed studies were accepted only if they met all the following eligibility criteria: (a) healthy male and female athletes between the ages of 18-65 years; (b) training program based on resistance exercises; (c) training program lasted for at least 4 weeks or 12 training sessions, with at least two sessions per week; (d) the study reported maximum strength, speed, or endurance outcomes; and (e) systematic reviews, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies were excluded. Of the 6,516 articles identified, 133 studies were selected for rating by the PEDro scale. Sixty-eight percent of the included studies used random allocation to groups, but only one reported concealed allocation. Baseline data are presented in almost 69% of the studies. Thirty-eight percent of studies demonstrated adequate follow-up of participants. The plan to follow the intention-to-treat or stating that all participants received training intervention or control conditions as allocated were reported in only 1.5% of studies. The procedure of blinding of assessors was also satisfied in only 1.5% of the studies. The current study highlights the gaps in designing and reporting research in the field of strength and conditioning. Randomization, blinding of assessors, reporting of attrition, and intention-to-treat analysis should be more fully addressed to reduce threats to internal validity in primary research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.