ArticleFrontiers in physiology2024
Is inertial training more effective than traditional resistance training in young healthy males?
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Effects of Advanced Resistance Training Prescription Methods on Strength, Power, Hypertrophy, and Performance Adaptations in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of early inertial exercises on morphological and functional recovery after ACL reconstruction.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- An experimental study on the effects of different strength training methods on smash performance and scoring in adolescent badminton players.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Inertial training, also called flywheel training is more and more popular among sportsmen. The available data concerning the effectiveness of inertial training compared to conventional resistance strength training are contradictory. The aim of this study was to compare the impact of inertial training (IT) vs. traditional gravity-dependent resistance training (TRT) on elbow flexor and knee extensor strength. Methods: Twenty-six young, recreationally active males were randomized into IT group (n = 13) or TRT group (n = 13). Both groups performed strength training three times a week for 6 weeks. Before and after training, the maximum force of the trained muscles was evaluated under training conditions (one repetition maximum under gravity-dependent conditions and maximal force under inertial conditions) and isometric conditions. Countermovement jump, squat jump, pull-up test, and limb circumference were also evaluated. Results: Elbow flexor muscle strength and arm circumference increased significantly in both IT and TRT over the course of training. There were no significant differences in relative muscle strength increases between groups. Knee extensor muscle strength also improved significantly in IT, regardless of the tested conditions, while TRT showed significant changes in one repetition maximum and isometric force but no significant changes in force obtained under inertial conditions. Thigh circumference increased in IT (P ≤ 0.05) but was unchanged in TRT. Jumping abilities improved significantly in both groups, without any differences between groups. Conclusion: We cannot confirm the superiority of inertial training over traditional resistance training definitively. Nevertheless, inertial training had a slight advantage over traditional resistance training when knee extensor muscle training was considered.
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.