Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36396899›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2023

Quantifying the Generality of Strength Adaptation: A Meta-Analysis.

Robert W Spitz, Ryo Kataoka, Scott J Dankel, Zachary W Bell, Jun Seob Song, Vickie Wong, Yujiro Yamada, Jeremy P Loenneke

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Robert W SpitzKevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise, Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Ryo KataokaKevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise, Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Scott J DankelExercise Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health and Exercise Science, Rowan University, Glassboro, NJ, USA.
Zachary W BellKevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise, Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Jun Seob SongKevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise, Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Vickie WongKevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise, Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Yujiro YamadaKevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise, Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA.
Jeremy P LoennekeKevser Ermin Applied Physiology Laboratory, Department of Health, Exercise, Science, and Recreation Management, The University of Mississippi, P.O. Box 1848, University, MS, 38677, USA. jploenne@olemiss.edu.
University of Mississippi · USRowan University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIsotonic exercise is the most common mode of strength training. Isotonic strength is often measured in the movement that was exercised, but isometric and isokinetic movements are also commonly used to quantify changes in muscular strength. Previous research suggests that increasing strength in one movement may not lead to an increase in strength in a different movement. Quantifying the increase in strength in a movement not trained may be important for understanding strength training adaptations and making recommendations for resistance exercise and rehabilitation programs.

objectiveTo quantify changes in non-specific strength relative to a control.

designA systematic review and random effects meta-analysis was conducted investigating the effects of isotonic strength training on isotonic and isokinetic/isometric strength. SEARCH AND INCLUSION: This systematic review was conducted in Google scholar, PubMed, Academic Search Premier, and MENDELEY. To be included in this review paper the article needed to meet the following criteria: (1) report sufficient data for our variables of interest (i.e., changes in isotonic strength and changes in isokinetic or isometric strength); (2) include a time-matched non-exercise control; (3) be written in English; (4) include healthy human participants over the age of 18 years; (5) the participants had to train and test isotonically; (6) the participants had to be tested isokinetically or isometrically on a device different from that they trained on; (7) the non-specific strength task had to test a muscle involved in the training (i.e., could not have trained chest press and test handgrip strength); and (8) the control group and the experimental group had to perform the same number of strength tests.

resultsWe completed two separate searches. In the original search a total of 880 papers were screened and nine papers met the inclusion criteria. In the secondary search a total of 2594 papers were screened and three additional papers were added (total of 12 studies). The overall effect of resistance training on changes in strength within a movement that was not directly trained was 0.8 (Cohen's d) with a standard error of 0.286. This overall effect was significant (t = 2.821, p = 0.01) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) is 0.22-1.4. The overall effect of resistance training on strength changes within a movement that was directly trained was 1.84 (Cohen's d) with a standard error of 0.296. This overall effect was significant (t = 6.221, p < 0.001) and the 95% CI is 1.23-2.4.

conclusionThe results of our meta-analysis suggest that strength increases in both the specific and non-specific strength tests. However, the smaller effect size associated with non-specific strength suggests that it will be difficult for a single study to meaningfully investigate the transfer of strength training adaptions.

Indexed as

Hand StrengthResistance TrainingAcclimatizationAdaptation, PhysiologicalAdultHumansMiddle AgedMuscle, SkeletalMuscle Strength

Identifiers

PMID36396899
OpenAlexW4309265122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.