Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2024
Polarized running training adapted to versus contrary to the menstrual cycle phases has similar effects on endurance performance and cardiovascular parameters.
Trial report 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeThis study compared the effects of polarized running training adapted to the menstrual cycle (MC) phases versus polarized training adapted contrary to the MC on endurance performance and cardiovascular parameters.
methodsThirty-three naturally menstruating, moderately trained females (age: 26 ± 4 years; BMI: 22.3 ± 3.2 kg/m
resultsTwenty-six females completed the intervention. A repeated measures ANOVA determined no time × group interaction effect for any parameter. A significant time effect was found for maximal oxygen uptake (F(1,12) = 18.753, p = 0.005, η
conclusionThe training intervention improved endurance performance in both groups, with no further benefit observed from the MC-adapted polarized training in a group-based analysis. Replications with an extended intervention period, a larger sample size, and a more reliable MC determination are warranted.
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.