ArticlePloS one2026
Orthostatic tolerance and training methodology in physically active men and women.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies suggest that training methodology alters orthostatic tolerance in elite and/or well-trained athletes. However, little is known about the effect of training methodology on orthostatic tolerance among the general physically active population. We tested the hypothesis that men and women participating in hybrid training (i.e., combined resistance and endurance training) would demonstrate superior orthostatic tolerance compared to aerobic endurance trained and recreationally active individuals. Twenty-nine participants were classified into one of the three groups depending on their current, self-reported training methodology. All participants reported at least 150 minutes per week of recreational activity (Recreationally Active Group; n = 10), hybrid training classes (Hybrid Group; n = 9), or endurance training (Endurance Group; n = 10) for ≥6 months. Anthropometrics (height and mass) were measured, and body composition was assessed via air displacement plethysmography. Orthostatic tolerance was assessed by a progressive lower-body negative pressure (LBNP) test and quantified via cumulative stress index (CSI). CSI did not differ between groups (p = 0.2542). Fat-free mass (FFM) was positively related to CSI (R² = 0.4092) and differed between groups (recreationally active: 56.1 ± 10.0 kg; hybrid: 65.5 ± 13.2 kg; endurance: 51.2 ± 10.5 kg; p = 0.0453). However, CSI normalized to FFM did not differ between groups (p = 0.6210; FFM missing for two participants). Among recreationally active adults, training methodology does not appear to modify orthostatic tolerance. Consistent with previous work, we report that body composition and anthropometrics are related to orthostatic tolerance highlighting the importance in maintaining lean mass regardless of training methodology.
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.