Trial reportPloS one2025
Block strength training based on age-related functional consequences in older women.
Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exercise, Cellular Senescence, and Cancer: Novel Perspectives on Functional Aging Through Block Strength Training in Older Adults-A Narrative Review.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- PRETIE-Q Spanish Version and Affective-Functional Responses to Age-Based Strength Training in Older Women: An Exploratory Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Strength training is a form of healthy ageing in older women. Although recommendations currently exist, some are very broad or fail to cover the needs of aging. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of blocks strength training based on age-related functional consequences on functional performance in older adult women. 82 community-dwelling older women (70.17 ± 6.04 y) were randomly assigned to either experimental (n = 40) or control (n = 42) group. Experimental group performed a Block Strength Training (BST) program based on strength, power, and muscular endurance, and different level of effort for 9 weeks, and control maintained daily routine with physical activity recommendations. Functional performance was assessed using absolute handgrip strength [AHS], timed up and go [TUG], two-minutes step test [2MST], five times stand-to-sit test [5-SST], 6-m walking speed test [6-WS] pre-post intervention. Statistical analyses were performed using two-way ANOVA (Time*Group) and effect size (partial eta-squared, ŋP2) with a significance level of p < 0.05. BST improved functional performance in the protocols of AHS (21.51 vs. 23.07-kg; + 7%), TUG (8.22 vs. 7.29-sec; + 11%), 2MST (78.76 vs. 97.18-steps; + 23%), 5-SST (12.68 vs. 9.43-sec; + 26%), and 6-WS (1.16 vs. 1.36- m·s-1; + 17%) compared to control (19.31 vs. 19.66-kg; 8.94 vs. 9.26-sec; 62.68 vs. 63.73-steps; 13.99 vs. 14.25-sec; 1.06 vs. 1.06-m·s-1, respectively) in a Time*Group interaction effect (p < 0.01; ŋP2 > 0.11). This BST is effective in improving overall functional performance and thus reducing the risk of physical frailty in community-dwelling older women. These findings strengthen the approach to exercise programming over recommendations, moving toward effective precision dosing for older adults.
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.