Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40041305›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of lifestyle medicine

Selecting Resistance Training Exercises for Novices: A Delphi Study with Expert Consensus.

Justin M Kompf, Ryan E Rhodes, Sohee Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of lifestyle medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Justin M KompfPsychology Department, Lifespan Laboratory Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA (JMK); Exercise Science Physical & Health Education, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada (RER); and Sports Studies, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand (SL).ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1255-5471
Ryan E RhodesPsychology Department, Lifespan Laboratory Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA (JMK); Exercise Science Physical & Health Education, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada (RER); and Sports Studies, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand (SL).
Sohee LeePsychology Department, Lifespan Laboratory Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, USA (JMK); Exercise Science Physical & Health Education, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada (RER); and Sports Studies, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand (SL).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Resistance training (RT) is a form of exercise that provides numerous health benefits. One barrier to participation may be the technical demands associated with some exercises. While recommendations for RT, including the number of repetitions, sets, rest, and training loads are established, recommendations for exercise selection have not been addressed. We used a Delphi-type method in three iterative surveys. In the first survey, 17 experts rated the technical complexity of 77 different strength training exercises as having low, moderate, or high technical demands. A second survey was generated based on the first, such that exercises receiving a majority high complexity vote were removed. In the second survey, experts rated the remaining exercises as either appropriate or too advanced for a novice. Exercises were deemed appropriate if 70% agreement was reached. Lastly, experts rated exercises as being appropriate for adults over the age of 60. Experts agreed that 41 different exercises were appropriate for novices and that 32 of the exercises were appropriate for novice adults over the age of 60. Our findings provide recommendations for program design to compliment already established recommendations for RT of repetitions, sets, rest periods, and training loads.

Indexed as

exercise selectionnovicesProgrammingrecommendationsstrength training

Identifiers

PMID40041305
PMCPMC11873903

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.