Trial reportEuropean journal of sport science2025
Acute Effects of Traditional Versus Cluster Set Upper Body Resistance Training on Heart Rate Variability and Blood Pressure in Trained Men.
Trial report in European journal of sport science, 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.
- When Load Does not Tell the Whole Story: Acute Effects of Effort Matched Resistance Training Protocols on Arterial Stiffness.European journal of sport science · 2026Article
- Effects of post-match foam rolling, static stretching, and passive rest on acute cardiac-autonomic, hemodynamic, and neuromuscular recovery in national wrestlers.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 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
Traditional (TRD) and cluster set (CLT) resistance training (RT) configurations differentially affect cardiovascular parameters, such as heart rate variability (HRV) and blood pressure (BP), but the cardiovascular effects of upper body TRD and CLT with multiple exercises remain unclear. To compare the acute effects of upper body TRD and CLT on postexercise HRV and BP variables. Sixteen men with ≥ 1 year of RT experience participated in this randomized crossover study. Subjects performed four upper-body exercises in both protocols, matched for volume, intensity, and rest periods. HRV and BP were measured pre-exercise, postexercise, and again every 10 min for 40 min postexercise. Heart rate was elevated in both conditions until 30 min for TRD, but recovered by 20 min for CLT, and was lower in CLT versus TRD at 20-40 min (p values < 0.05). Root mean square of successive differences was reduced in both conditions until 30 min in TRD, but recovered by 20 min in CLT, with higher values in CLT versus TRD at 20-40 min (p values < 0.05). Despite no interaction (p > 0.05), systolic BP (SBP) was higher overall in CLT (p < 0.05). Moreover, effect sizes revealed moderate SBP reductions from pre-exercise across all postexercise time points in TRD, with SBP lower in TRD versus CLT at 20-40 min (small-to-moderate effect sizes). CLT promoted faster cardiac-autonomic recovery, whereas TRD tended to promote greater postexercise hypotension. Thus, set configuration should be selected based on specific goals, such as accelerating parasympathetic reactivation or reducing SBP.
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.