SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Maximizing Adaptations in Concurrent Training: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConcurrent training (CT), the combination of resistance training (RT) and endurance training (ET), is widely used in athletic and clinical settings. However, concerns about a potential interference effect have prompted ongoing debate regarding its impact on strength, power, hypertrophy, and aerobic capacity.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, and PsycNet following PRISMA guidelines and the four-eyes principle (28th February 2025). Main outcomes included aerobic capacity, muscle strength, power, and hypertrophy. Subgroup analyses were performed based on training modality, performance level, age, resistance training load, and endurance intensity.
resultsSeventeen meta-analyses comprising 144 individual studies and 1492 healthy participants were included. Umbrella data revealed comparable improvements in aerobic capacity for CT and ET. CT revealed significantly greater strength adaptations compared with ET (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.59; p < 0.001). Compared with RT, CT significantly improved aerobic capacity (SMD 0.77; p = 0.02), while strength, power, and hypertrophy outcomes were comparable. No significant effects of training sequence were found; however, trends suggest performing RT before ET may favor strength (SMD 1.69; p < 0.001) and hypertrophy (SMD 0.83; p = 0.36) gains.
conclusionCT improves both aerobic capacity and strength-related outcomes, making it a valuable strategy for comprehensive fitness development for recreationally trained individuals. While no relevant differences were found regarding the training sequence, performing RT before ET may enhance strength and hypertrophy adaptations. However, data from highly trained to elite athletes remain scarce and warrant further investigation. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42025646460.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41762427What 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.