ArticleJournal of lifestyle medicine2025
Enhancing Lung Function in Novice Athletes: The Role of Respiratory Muscle Training.
Article in Journal of lifestyle medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Respiratory muscle training (RMT) plays a vital role in improving respiratory muscle strength, mitigating inspiratory muscle fatigue, and influencing the metaboreflex mechanism, thereby enhancing cardiorespiratory endurance during sports. Performing endurance activities and using devices that improve lung function can delay inspiratory muscle fatigue and improve total sports performance. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of use of newly developed RMT devices under the golden ratio principle with conventional training on lung function enhancement in novice athletes, as well as compare a new RMT with conventional (CON) treatment. Methods: This study included 12 participants who were allocated randomly to either the RMT or CON group (n = 6 each). Both groups were trained for 15 minutes daily for four weeks. Both groups were initially tested for respiratory pressures and capacities maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP), maximal expiratory pressure (MEP), forced expiratory volume in first second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), and FEV1/FVC at baseline and post-intervention. Within-group and between-group comparisons were performed using paired t-tests and independent t-tests, respectively. Results: The respiratory pressures of the RMT group after training (pre-RMT 425.00 ± 277.04 mmWC vs. post-RMT 541.67 ± 274.62 mmWC) were significantly improved (t = 11.07, p < 0.001) compared with those of the CON treatment group (pre-RMT 508.33 ± 217.75 mmWC vs. post-RMT 575.00 ± 229.67 mmWC). The new RMT device improved MIP, MEP, and lung function, with greater gains in FEV1 (pre-RMT 2.66 ± 0.74 L vs. post-RMT 2.86 ± 0.70 L) (pre-CON 3.04 ± 0.80 L vs. post-CON 3.06 ± 0.74 L), FVC (pre-RMT 3.03 ± 0.99 L vs. post-RMT 3.22 ± 0.94 L) (pre-CON 3.33 ± 1.06 L vs. post-CON 3.29 ± 0.99 L), and the FEV1/FVC ratio compared with both the RMT and CON treatment groups. Although the between-group differences in MIP and MEP were not statistically significant, improvements in FEV1 and FVC were significantly higher in the new RMT group than in the CON treatment group (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The findings revealed that the RMT devices helped to improve respiratory pressures and capacities to enhance endurance among novice athletes. Furthermore, this golden ratio-designed device was found to help improve lung performance.
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.