ArticlePhysiological reports2025
Association of allostatic load measured by allostatic load index on physical performance and psychological responses during arduous military training.
Article in Physiological reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Skeletal Muscle Redox Signaling in Health and Disease: From Molecular Mechanisms to Therapeutic Exercise Strategies.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Human limits in next-generation fighter aviation: psychophysiological stressors, readiness, health, performance, and countermeasures.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- The 4Rs Framework of Sports Nutrition: An Update with Recommendations to Evaluate Allostatic Load in Athletes.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Association of allostatic load measured by allostatic load index on physical performance and psychological responses during arduous military training.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- Sports injuries as reversible involution: a novel approach to rehabilitation and readaptation.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
- Advancing the allostatic load model in military training research: from theory to application.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Military personnel experience decrements in physical fitness and psychological well-being during training that may be attributed to allostatic load. This investigation examined the association between allostatic load measured by the allostatic load index (ALI) and physical performance and psychological responses in personnel undergoing a 10-week training course. Thirty-one participants (14 women) provided biochemical, questionnaire (perceived stress appraisal (PSS), sleep difficulty (SD), resilience (CD-RISC-25), and Physical Fitness Test (PFT; three-mile run [3MR], pullups, Run-Row PFT score, Push-Pull PFT score, Crunches-Plank PFT score, and total PFT score)) data before and after training. ALI (0-8) was calculated using biomarker components from neuroendocrine, autonomic, and immune systems. Simple linear regression analysis assessed the association between change (Δ) in ALI and responses. Backward stepwise regression identified components associated with responses (α = 0.05). In men, ΔALI was associated with Δpullups (β = -0.88, p = 0.015), Δpush-pull PFT score (β = -2.87, p = 0.013), Δtotal PFT score (β = -3.48, p = 0.007), and ΔSD (β = -0.56, p = 0.046) with immune components explaining relationships. In women, ΔALI was associated with ΔSD (β = -1.25, p < 0.001) and ΔCD-RISC-25 (β = 2.65, p = 0.025) with no component explaining relationships. Increased ALI is associated with worsened physical performance in men and improved psychological outcomes in women, highlighting potential sex-specific responses to increased allostatic load during training.
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.