ArticlePeerJ2025
Acute effect of three functional fitness training designs with equalized load on inexperienced and experienced athletes.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Time-Course of Recovery Following a Strength-Power Emphasized CrossfitSports (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the realm of functional fitness training (FFT), three common circuits-as many repetitions or round as possible (AMRAP), for time (FT), and every minute on a minute (EMOM)-are prevalent. We aimed to elucidate the immediate impacts on athletes, considering the experience, when performing three workout modalities with matched training loads. Methods: Twenty-five healthy men and women, with at least three months of experience in FFT, were allocated into the Inexperienced group (IG) and Experienced group (EG). The cut point for allocating participant in each group was set at 24 months. All of them participated in three workouts (AMRAP, FT and EMOM) with three days of rest. A double comparison was performed between level of experience (IG and EG) and among kinds of training in rating of perceived exertion (RPE), lactate concentration (LAC), countermovement jump (CMJ), heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) using ANOVA and Results: Sex was initially analyzed but had no influence, leading to combined group analyses. The workout type significantly impacted performance, with AMRAP showing differences between expertise levels (ES = 0.81, Conclusion: The study demonstrates that FT produced greater LAC and RPE as compared to an AMRAP, whereas EMOM generated less neuromuscular fatigue and Lac, particularly in EG. These results underscore the importance of individualizing workout selection to expertise level to optimize performance. Future research should explore longitudinal adaptation to different workout types across diverse populations.
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.