ArticleCureus2024
Influence of Conventional Resistance Training Compared to Core Exercises on Road Cycling Power Output.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Heavy strength training effects on physiological determinants of endurance cyclist performance: a systematic review with meta-analysis.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Resistance Training for Cyclists: Scientific Evidence and Practical Recommendations.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2026Review
- Effects of Core Strength Training on Maximal Trunk Muscle Strength and Cycling Economy in Female Mountain Bikers.Sports medicine - open · 2026Article
- Strength training among professional UCI road cyclists: Practices, challenges, and rationales.PloS one · 2025Article
- Strength Training Among Male Master Cyclists-Practices, Challenges, and Rationales.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Conventional strength training and core exercises are commonly prescribed to improve cycling performance. Although previous studies have explored the utility of strength training in various cycling populations, this intervention has never been compared to core exercises. Thirty-six trained road cyclists were divided into three groups of 12 participants that performed either no strength training, conventional strength training, or core exercises, in all cases together with their regular cycling training during a 12-week period. Peak power outputs (POs) across different durations (five seconds, 60 seconds, five minutes, and 20 minutes) were recorded before and after the intervention. The results of the present study showed higher increases in relative PO with conventional strength training when compared to core training and no strength training for all measured durations: five-second Δ = 1.25 W/kg vs 0.47 W/kg and -0.17 W/kg; 60-second (Δ = 0.51 W/kg vs 0.13 W/kg and 0.02 W/kg; five-minute Δ = 0.22 W/kg vs 0.06 W/kg and 0.05 W/kg; and 20-minute Δ = 0.22 W/kg vs 0.07 W/kg and 0.06 W/kg. According to the data obtained in this study, conventional strength training is superior to core exercises, and no strength training was performed by trained road cyclists. Accordingly, it is recommended that this population incorporates strength training during their regular weekly workouts.
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.