ArticleScientific reports2026
Exploring acute physiological adaptations to circuit strength training: the role of work-to-rest interval variations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the acute physiological responses to circuit strength training performed with different work-to-rest interval durations (10:10, 20:20, and 30:30 s) under a constant 1:1 ratio. Thirty-four trained adults (15 males and 19 females) completed a 14-min circuit protocol consisting of two blocks of 6-min separated by a 2-min rest period. Each session included six alternating upper- and lower-body exercises performed at maximal intended velocity. Heart rate (HR) was continuously monitored during the protocol, while blood lactate concentration, countermovement jump (CMJ) height, and 10-m sprint performance were assessed pre-, mid-, and post-circuit session. Repeated-measures ANOVA was used for CMJ height, blood lactate concentration and 10-m sprint performance, and one-way ANOVA for HR data. The 30:30 protocol elicited the highest post-exercise lactate concentrations (p < 0.05) and the largest decrements in CMJ height. In contrast, HR was consistently higher in the 10:10 protocol across several time points (p < 0.01), indicating greater cardiovascular demand. Sprint performance declined from pre- to post-exercise across all protocols, indicating a time-dependent fatigue response. These findings demonstrate that manipulating absolute work-to-rest durations, even under a fixed 1:1 ratio, produces distinct physiological responses, while performance decrements may occur independently of protocol configuration. Longer intervals (30:30) maximize metabolic stress and neuromuscular fatigue, whereas shorter intervals (10:10) enhance cardiovascular load. The 20:20 protocol represents a balanced alternative between both stimuli.
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.