SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2022
Are Trainees Lifting Heavy Enough? Self-Selected Loads in Resistance Exercise: A Scoping Review and Exploratory Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Individualized pleasure-oriented exercise sessions, exercise frequency, and affective outcomes: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2024Trial
- Imposed versus self-chosen organization during exercise: comparison of two modalities involving randomness, on mental and physical responses.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Training competence questionnaire for endurance and strength training: development and validation.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Does Performing Partial Repetitions Beyond Momentary Failure Enhance Muscle Hypertrophy in Volume-Load-Equated Calf-Raise Resistance Training?International journal of exercise science · 2026Article
- A professional assessment of training plans for muscle hypertrophy and maximal strength developed by generative artificial intelligence.Biology of sport · 2025Article
- Sex differences in fatiguability during single-joint resistance exercise in a resistance-trained population.European journal of applied physiology · 2024Article
- Resistance Exercise Minimal Dose Strategies for Increasing Muscle Strength in the General Population: an Overview.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2024Review
- Is there a beneficial effect of a high-protein diet on body composition and strength capacity in physical active middle-aged individuals?-An eight-week randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Exercise instructors are not consistently implementing the strength component of the UK chief medical officers' physical activity guidelines in their exercise prescription for older adults.BMC public health · 2023Article
- 'A Lot of People Just Go for Walks, and Don't Do Anything Else': Older Adults in the UK Are Not Aware of the Strength Component Embedded in the Chief Medical Officers' Physical Activity Guidelines-A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditionally, the loads in resistance training are prescribed as a percentage of the heaviest load that can be successfully lifted once (i.e., 1 Repetition Maximum [1RM]). An alternative approach is to allow trainees to self-select the training loads. The latter approach has benefits, such as allowing trainees to exercise according to their preferences and negating the need for periodic 1RM tests. However, in order to better understand the utility of the self-selected load prescription approach, there is a need to examine what loads trainees select when given the option to do so.
objectiveExamine what loads trainees self-select in resistance training sessions as a percentage of their 1RM.
designScoping review and exploratory meta-analysis. SEARCH AND INCLUSION: We conducted a systematic literature search with PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar in September 2021. We included studies that (1) were published in English in a peer-reviewed journal or as a MSc or Ph.D. thesis; (2) had healthy trainees complete at least one resistance-training session, composed of at least one set of one exercise in which they selected the loads; (3) trainees completed a 1RM test for the exercises that they selected the loads for. Eighteen studies were included in our main meta-analysis model with 368 participants.
resultsOur main model indicated that on average participants select loads equal to 53% of their 1RM (95% credible interval [CI] 49-58%). There was little moderating effect of training experience, age, sex, timing of the 1RM test (before or after the selected load RT session), number of sets, number of repetitions, and lower versus upper body exercises. Participants did tend to select heavier loads when prescribed lower repetitions, and vice versa (logit(yi) = - 0.09 [95% CI - 0.16 to - 0.03]). Note that in most of the analyzed studies, participants received vague instructions regarding how to select the loads, and only completed a single session with the self-selected loads.
conclusionsParticipants selected loads equal to an average of 53% of 1RM across exercises. Lifting such a load coupled with a low-medium number of repetitions (e.g., 5-15) can sufficiently stimulate hypertrophy and increase maximal strength for novices but may not apply for more advanced trainees. Lifting such a load coupled with a higher number of repetitions and approaching or reaching task failure can be sufficient for muscle hypertrophy, but less so for maximal strength development, regardless of trainees' experience. The self-selected load prescription approach may bypass certain limitations of the traditional approach, but requires thought and further research regarding how, for what purposes, and with which populations it should be implemented.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35790622What 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.