Effects of Resisted Sprint Training and Sprint Performance and Related Physical Capacities: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.

backgroundResisted sprint training (RST) is widely used to improve sprint performance. However, synthesis is complicated because RST encompasses heterogeneous resistance modalities, loading approaches, sprint distances, training exposures, comparator conditions, and both acute responses and chronic adaptations.

objectivesOur aim was to synthesize evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the effects of RST on sprint performance, sprint mechanics, and related physical capacities, and to evaluate methodological quality, certainty of evidence, and overlap of primary studies.

methodsPubMed/MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to 17 August 2025, with supplementary reference screening, citation tracking, and registry checks. Systematic reviews with meta-analysis of RST interventions in healthy, active, or athletic populations were eligible. Reviews without meta-analysis were excluded. Acute responses and chronic training adaptations were retained but interpreted as distinct evidence streams. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR 2, certainty of evidence using a modified GRADE approach, and overlap using a citation matrix, corrected covered area, and the Graphical Representation of Overlap for Overviews tool.

resultsFifteen systematic reviews, comprising 6-157 primary studies and 109-978 participants, met the inclusion criteria. The most consistent evidence favored improvements in short-distance acceleration, particularly over ≤ 20 m. Benefits were also reported for change-of-direction performance and leg stiffness, although the magnitude and certainty of these effects varied across reviews. Findings for maximal-velocity sprinting, vertical stiffness, jump performance, and spatiotemporal sprint mechanics were inconsistent. Five reviews were rated as being of high methodological quality and the remainder as low quality. GRADE ratings ranged from very low to high and were frequently limited by risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision, and heterogeneity. Overall primary-study overlap was moderate, with repeated inclusion of several core studies within specific review clusters. Interpretation was further complicated by differences in resistance modality, load prescription, sprint phase, training exposure, comparator condition, and evidence type.

conclusionsResisted sprint interventions may improve short-distance acceleration, with the most applicable evidence derived from young male team sport athletes. However, RST represents a heterogeneous family of interventions rather than a single uniform training method. The available evidence does not establish a universally optimal modality or loading threshold, and conclusions regarding maximal velocity, sprint mechanics, and secondary physical capacities remain uncertain. Future research should apply clearer intervention definitions, distinguish acute from chronic outcomes, report athlete-specific loading responses, and improve the matching and reporting of training exposure across comparison groups. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/KPD83 ASSOCIATED PROJECT: https://osf.io/u3t5c.