Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37410360›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2023

The Effect of Feedback on Resistance Training Performance and Adaptations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Jonathon Weakley, Nicholas Cowley, Brad J Schoenfeld, Dale B Read, Ryan G Timmins, Amador García-Ramos, Thomas B McGuckian

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
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 34 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.7field-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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Effects of Integrated Sports Vision Training Batteries on Time- and Accuracy-Dependent Outcomes in Sport-Specific Tasks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Jonathon WeakleySchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, McAuley at Banyo, Brisbane, Australia. Jonathon.weakley@acu.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0001-7892-4885
Nicholas CowleySchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, McAuley at Banyo, Brisbane, Australia.
Brad J SchoenfeldDepartment of Exercise Science and Recreation, CUNY Lehman College, Bronx, NY, USA.
Dale B ReadCarnegie Applied Rugby Research (CARR) Centre, Carnegie School of Sport, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK.
Ryan G TimminsSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, McAuley at Banyo, Brisbane, Australia.
Amador García-RamosDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Thomas B McGuckianSchool of Behavioural and Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, McAuley at Banyo, Brisbane, Australia.
Australian Catholic University · AULeeds Beckett University · GBLehman College · USManchester Metropolitan University · GBUniversidad de Granada · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAugmented feedback is often used during resistance training to enhance acute physical performance and has shown promise as a method of improving chronic physical adaptation. However, there are inconsistencies in the scientific literature regarding the magnitude of the acute and chronic responses to feedback and the optimal method with which it is provided.

objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to (1) establish the evidence for the effects of feedback on acute resistance training performance and chronic training adaptations; (2) quantify the effects of feedback on acute kinematic outcomes and changes in physical adaptations; and (3) assess the effects of moderating factors on the influence of feedback during resistance training.

methodsTwenty studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. This review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Four databases were searched, and studies were included if they were peer-reviewed investigations, written in English, and involved the provision of feedback during or following dynamic resistance exercise. Furthermore, studies must have evaluated either acute training performance or chronic physical adaptations. Risk of bias was assessed using a modified Downs and Black assessment tool. Multilevel meta-analyses were performed to quantify the effects of feedback on acute and chronic training outcomes.

resultsFeedback enhanced acute kinetic and kinematic outputs, muscular endurance, motivation, competitiveness, and perceived effort, while greater improvements in speed, strength, jump performance, and technical competency were reported when feedback was provided chronically. Furthermore, greater frequencies of feedback (e.g., following every repetition) were found to be most beneficial for enhancing acute performance. Results demonstrated that feedback improves acute barbell velocities by approximately 8.4% (g = 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-0.90). Moderator analysis revealed that both verbal (g = 0.47, 95% CI 0.22-0.71) and visual feedback (g = 1.11, 95% CI 0.61-1.61) were superior to no feedback, but visual feedback was superior to verbal feedback. For chronic outcomes, jump performance might have been positively influenced (g = 0.39, 95% CI - 0.20 to 0.99) and short sprint performance was likely enhanced (g = 0.47, 95% CI 0.10-0.84) to a greater extent when feedback is provided throughout a training cycle.

conclusionsFeedback during resistance training can lead to enhanced acute performance within a training session and greater chronic adaptations. Studies included in our analysis demonstrated a positive influence of feedback, with all outcomes showing superior results than when no feedback is provided. For practitioners, it is recommended that high-frequency, visual feedback is consistently provided to individuals when they complete resistance training, and this may be particularly useful during periods of low motivation or when greater competitiveness is beneficial. Alternatively, researchers must be aware of the ergogenic effects of feedback on acute and chronic responses and ensure that feedback is standardised when investigating resistance training.

Indexed as

Resistance TrainingAcclimatizationAdaptation, PhysiologicalExerciseHumansMuscle Strength

Identifiers

PMID37410360
PMCPMC10432365
OpenAlexW4383302515

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.