ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2024
Hypoxia matters: comparison of external and internal training load markers during an 8-week resistance training program in normoxia, normobaric hypoxia and hypobaric hypoxia.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effects of normobaric hypoxic resistance training on muscle strength in healthy adults.European journal of applied physiology · 2025Pooled it
- Short-Term Intermittent Normobaric Hypoxia Combined with Light Exercise Improves Acclimatization of Cardiorespiratory Function in Inactive Adults.Open access journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
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
Abstract
purposeTo compare external and internal training load markers during resistance training (R
methodsThirty-three volunteers were assigned an 8-week R
resultsSmaller relative improvements were found for the back squat in the N group (11.5 ± 8.8%) when compared to the NH group (22.2 ± 8.2%, P = 0.01) and the HH group (22 ± 8.1%, P = 0.02). All groups showed similar RVL, HR responses and RPE across the program (P˃0.05). However, reduced HR recovery values, calculated as the difference between the highest HR value (HR
conclusionIt seems that 8 weeks of intermittent R
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.