ArticleScandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports2025
Neuromuscular Adaptations to Same Versus Separate Muscle-Group Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Training in Recreationally Active Males and Females.
Article in Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
- Velocity Loss During Resistance Training: Implications for Concurrent Training Adaptations.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2026Trial
- Stronger hearts, weaker leaps? The cardiac power paradox in elite soccer.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Beyond hypertrophy: a network physiology perspective on the cardio-neuromuscular trade-off in elite soccer.Frontiers in network physiology · 2026Article
- Neuromuscular adaptations to resistance training in elite versus recreational athletes.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- Individual load-velocity measures are associated with 2,000-m rowing ergometer performance in German national rowers.Frontiers in sports and active living · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Combining aerobic and strength training may attenuate neuromuscular adaptations, particularly when both target the same muscle group. This study assessed whether separating the training modalities by muscle groups mitigates this interference. Ninety-six participants (56 males and 40 females) completed a 12-week intervention, divided into three groups: (1) LHLS (lower-body high-intensity interval (HIIT) and strength training), (2) LHUS (lower-body HIIT and upper-body strength training), and (3) LSUS (lower- and upper-body strength training). Maximal (1RM) and explosive strength were assessed using load-velocity profiling, with mean propulsive velocity (MPV) at 30%, 50%, 70%, and 90% of 1RM as a measure of explosive strength. Muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) of the M. vastus lateralis and M. pectoralis major was measured using panoramic ultrasound. Lower-body adaptations were compared between LHLS and LSUS, and upper-body adaptations were compared between LHUS and LSUS. MPV at 70% and 90% of 1RM for the squat (LHLS and LSUS) and bench press (LHUS and LSUS) showed improvements (p < 0.050), with no significant between-group differences. Squat 1RM improved in both LHLS and LSUS, and bench press 1RM increased in both LHUS and LSUS (all p < 0.001). M. vastus lateralis CSA increased in LHLS (p = 0.029) but not in LSUS, whereas M. pectoralis major CSA increased in both LHUS and LSUS (p < 0.001), with no between-group differences. No sex-based differences were observed. Concurrent aerobic and strength training does not impair explosive strength, maximal strength, or muscle hypertrophy, regardless of whether the same or separate muscle groups are targeted.
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.