Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38524820›Full record

ArticleBiology of sport2024

Artificial intelligence in sport: Exploring the potential of using ChatGPT in resistance training prescription.

Jad Adrian Washif, Jeffrey Pagaduan, Carl James, Ismail Dergaa, Christopher Martyn Beaven

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology of sport, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
–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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Jad Adrian WashifSports Performance Division, National Sports Institute of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Jeffrey PagaduanInstitute of Active Lifestyle, Palacký University Olomouc, Czech Republic.
Carl JamesDepartment of Sport, Physical Education and Health, Hong Kong Baptist University. Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong SAR.
Ismail DergaaPrimary Health Care Corporation (PHCC), Doha, Qatar.
Christopher Martyn BeavenTe Huataki Waiora School of Health, University of Waikato, Tauranga, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OpenAI's Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer (ChatGPT) technology enables conversational interactions with applications across various fields, including sport. Here, ChatGPT's proficiency in designing a 12-week resistance training programme, following specific prompts, was investigated. GPT3.5 and GPT4.0 versions were requested to design 12-week resistance training programmes for male and female hypothetical subjects (20-years-old, no injury, and 'intermediate' resistance training experience). Subsequently, GPT4.0 was requested to design an 'advanced' training programme for the same profiles. The proposed training programmes were compared with established guidelines and literature (e.g., National Strength and Conditioning Association textbook), and discussed. ChatGPT suggested 12-week training programmes comprising three, 4-week phases, each with different objectives (e.g., hypertrophy/strength). GPT3.5 proposed a weekly frequency of ~3 sessions, load intensity of 70-85% of one repetition-maximum, repetition range of 4-8 (2-4 sets), and tempo of 2/0/2 (eccentric/pause/concentric/'pause'). GPT4.0 proposed intermediate- and advanced programme, with a frequency of 5 or 4 sessions, 60-90% or 70-95% intensity, 3-5 sets or 3-6 sets, 5-12 or 3-12 repetitions, respectively. GPT3.5 proposed rest intervals of 90-120 s, and exercise tempo of 2/0/2. GPT4.0 proposed 60-180 (intermediate) or 60-300 s (advanced), with exercise tempo of 2/1/2 for intermediates, and 3/0/1/0, 2/0/1/0, and 1/0/1/0 for advanced programmes. All derived programmes were objectively similar regardless of sex. ChatGPT generated training programmes which likely require additional fine-tuning before application. GPT4.0 synthesised more information than GPT3.5 in response to the prompt, and demonstrated recognition awareness of training experience (intermediate vs advanced). ChatGPT may serve as a complementary tool for writing 'draft' programme, but likely requires human expertise to maximise training programme effectiveness.

Indexed as

ChatbotExercise prescriptionIndividualised trainingPeriodisationProgrammingStrength training

Identifiers

PMID38524820
PMCPMC10955742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-SA
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.