ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2024
Comparison of resistance training vs static stretching on flexibility and maximal strength in healthy physically active adults, a randomized controlled trial.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07061041 (Comparison of the Effects of Static Stretching and Full Range of Motion Strength Training on Posterior Band Flexibility), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
Comparison of the Effects of Static Stretching and Full Range of Motion Strength Training on Posterior Band Flexibility
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Moderating Effects of Individual Characteristics and the Target Lower Limb Muscle Group on Flexibility Adaptations to Chronic Static Stretching in Healthy Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Sports medicine - open · 2026Pooled it
- A meta-analysis of the effects of strength training on physical fitness in dancers.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Pooled it
- High- versus low-volume static stretching and eccentric exercise: a randomized controlled trial in older adults with hamstring tightness and possible sarcopenia.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Effects of Low-Volume Static Stretching and Full Range-of-Motion Resistance Training on Flexibility in Physically Active Young Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Two-dimensional kinematic analysis of futsal instep shot performance in trained and novice players.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Field-Based Concurrent Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of a Portable Force Platform During IMTP and Countermovement Jump Assessments.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Decoding free-throw accuracy: a 2D biomechanical comparison of shooting mechanics in athletes and novice basketball players.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- The Effects of High-Power Laser Therapy on the Treatment of Patients with Myofascial Trigger Points in the Upper Trapezius Muscle: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of lasers in medical sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the present study was to compare the effects of resistance training through full range of motion and static stretching (SS) of the hip and lower back extensors on flexibility and strength in healthy, physically active, adults.
methodsEighteen participants (age: 24.2 ± 3.0 years, body mass: 71.3 ± 8.9 kg, height: 172.8 ± 7.5 cm) were randomly assigned to either a Resistance Training (RT) (n = 6), SS (n = 6), or control (CON) group (n = 6). The sit & reach (S&R) flexibility test and maximum isometric straight legged deadlift (ISLDL) at 95% and 50% range of motion (ROM) were tested pre- and post-intervention with significance set at p < 0.05. Both groups conducted four to eight sets per session. Within each set, the RT group performed eight repetitions each lasting four seconds, while the SS group stretched continuously for 32 s. The rest periods between each set were 60-90 s. Consequently training volume and rest times were matched between the groups.
resultsThe RT and SS groups achieved significant, large magnitude improvements in the S&R test compared to the CON group (p < 0.01 g = 2.53 and p = 0.01, g = 2.44), but no differences were observed between the RT and SS groups (p = 1.00). Furthermore, the RT group demonstrated a larger improvement in 50% and 95% ROM ISLDL compared to SS (p < 0.01, g = 2.69-3.36) and CON (p < 0.01, g = 2.44-2.57).
conclusionResistance training through a full ROM was equally effective as SS for improving S&R flexibility, but improved hip- and lower back extensor strength more than SS and the CON. The authors recommend using large ROM resistance training to improve hip and lower back extensor flexibility and muscle strength.
trial registrationISRCTN88839251, registered 24. April 2024, Retrospectively registered.
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.