Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37234555›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2023

Characteristics of resistance training-based protocols in older adults with sarcopenic obesity: a scoping review of training procedure recommendations.

Leonardo Santos Lopes da Silva, Leonardo da Silva Gonçalves, Pedro Pugliesi Abdalla, Cícero Jonas Rodrigues Benjamim, Márcio Fernando Tasinafo, Ana Cláudia Rossini Venturini, Lucimere Bohn, Jorge Mota, Pablo Jorge Marcos-Pardo, Wolfgang Kemmler and 2 more

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

12 authors.

Leonardo Santos Lopes da SilvaSchool of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto (EEFERP/USP), University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Leonardo da Silva GonçalvesSchool of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto (EEFERP/USP), University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Pedro Pugliesi AbdallaStudy and Research Group in Anthropometry, Training, and Sport (GEPEATE), School of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirao Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Cícero Jonas Rodrigues BenjamimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Márcio Fernando TasinafoSchool of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto (EEFERP/USP), University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Ana Cláudia Rossini VenturiniStudy and Research Group in Anthropometry, Training, and Sport (GEPEATE), School of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirao Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Lucimere BohnFaculty of Psychology, Education and Sport, Lusófona University, Porto, Portugal.
Jorge MotaResearch Center in Physical Activity, Health and Leisure (CIAFEL), Faculty of Sports, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Pablo Jorge Marcos-PardoNeuropsychological Evaluation and Rehabilitation (CERNEP) Research Centre, Scientific Projects Organization and Research Training (SPORT) Research Group (CTS-1024), Department of Education, Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Almería, Almería, Spain.
Wolfgang KemmlerInstitute of Medical Physics, Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
André Pereira Dos SantosSchool of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto (EEFERP/USP), University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.
Dalmo Roberto Lopes MachadoSchool of Physical Education and Sport of Ribeirão Preto (EEFERP/USP), University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Sarcopenic obesity (SO) is a clinical and functional disease characterized by the coexistence of obesity and sarcopenia. Resistance training (RT) characteristics for older adults with sarcopenia or obesity are already well established in the scientific literature. Nonetheless, we still do not know how detailed the RT protocols are described for older adults with SO. Therefore, we aimed to analyze the characteristics of RT programs, including each of their variables, recommended for older adults with SO. Methods: This is a scoping review study that was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis for Scoping Reviews. The search was carried out until November 2022 in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS, Google Scholar, and medRxiv databases. The studies included SO diagnosis and RT as an intervention strategy. The RT variables analyzed were as follows: exercise selection, the volume of sets, the intensity of load, repetition cadence, rest interval between sets, and weekly frequency. Results: A total of 1,693 studies were identified. After applying the exclusion criteria, 15 studies were included in the final analysis. The duration of the RT intervention ranged from 8 to 24 weeks. All studies included full-body routines, with single/multi-joint exercises. Regarding the volume of sets, some studies fixed it in three sets, whereas others varied between one and three sets. The load was reported by repetition range and the weight lifted, elastic-band color/resistance, percentage of one repetition maximum, or perceived exertion scale. Repetition cadence was fixed in some studies, while it was self-selected between concentric and eccentric phases in others. The interval between sets of rest varied from 30 to 180 s. All studies reported progression overload during the interventions. Not all studies reported how the exercise selection, repetition cadence, and rest interval were made. Conclusion: The characteristics of RT protocols and their variables prescribed in the literature for older adults with SO were mapped. The lack of detail on some training variables (i.e., exercise selection, repetition cadence, and rest interval) was identified. RT protocols are heterogeneous and described only partially among studies. The recommendations for RT prescription details in older adults with SO are provided for future studies. Systematic review registration: https://osf.io/wzk3d/.

Indexed as

body compositionexercise trainingperiodizationsarcopeniastrength training

Identifiers

PMID37234555
PMCPMC10206023

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.