PART 1: Synthesis Matrix

Name: Michael Musser Period: 4

STEP 1: Planning your Synthesis Matrix Analysis of Literature

Pre-planning: Concept Matrix of Literature. ​Read at least 15-20 articles that are related to your foundation sub problem. Look for a variety of variable that are
similar to your interest and overarching question. As you do a quick read of the articles, mark the variables that you are planning to consider as your applied
research. Please change the variables as needed since this is an example template. The checks (X) in the boxes are merely examples – remove them before you
start your planning analysis. ​https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237542915_The_Matrix_Method_of_Literature_Review

Preplanning​​: ​Concept Matrix of Literature

Author (s), title, etc. (APA format) Years (in the weight lifting Strength gain Muscle compound
last 5 years hypertrophy exercises
if not
checked)
Henrik P., Lofving P, & Psilander N. X X X X
(2018). ​The Effect of Two Different
Concurrent Training Programs on
Strength and Power Gains in
Highly-Trained Individuals.​ ​Journal of
Sports Science and Medicin​e, 17​(3),
167-170. Retrieved from
go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabI
D=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&
searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchT
ype=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPo
sition=1&docId=GALE%7CA545431868
&docType=Report&sort=Relevance&c
ontentSegment=&prodId=GPS&conten
tSet=GALE%7CA545431868&searchId=
R40&userGroupName=mari36952&inP
S=true
Gao Z. (2008). ​College students' X X X X
motivation toward weight
training: a combined
perspective. ​Journal of Sport
Behavior, 13(​ 1), 22-27.
Retrieved from
go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.d
o?tabID=T002&resultListType
=RESULT_LIST&searchResult
sType=SingleTab&searchType
=AdvancedSearchForm&curren
tPosition=2&docId=GALE%7
CA175351090&docType=Repo
rt&sort=Relevance&contentSeg
ment=&prodId=GPS&contentS
et=GALE%7CA175351090&se
archId=R42&userGroupName=
mari36952&inPS=true

Brown L. E. (2009). Strength Training. X X

Palaestra, 24​(4), 53. Retrieved from
go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabI
D=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&
searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchT
ype=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPo
sition=7&docId=GALE%7CA223908694
&docType=Brief+article%2C+Video+re
cording+review&sort=Relevance&cont
entSegment=&prodId=GPS&contentSe
t=GALE%7CA223908694&searchId=R4
5&userGroupName=mari36952&inPS=
true#

Betz C. (1995). Good Moves for Every X X X X

Body. ​Physical Therapy, 75​(8), 133.
Retrieved from
go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabI
D=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&
searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchT
ype=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPo
sition=1&docId=GALE%7CA17372653&
docType=Video+recording+review&sor
t=Relevance&contentSegment=&prodI
d=GPS&contentSet=GALE%7CA173726
53&searchId=R46&userGroupName=
mari36952&inPS=true

Hessel A. L., Lindstedt S. L., & X X X X

Nishikawa K. C. (2017). Physiological
Mechanisms of Eccentric Contraction
and Its Applications: A Role for the
Giant Titin Protein. ​Frontiers in
Physiology.​ doi​:
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.
00070

Gorinski R., Haley D. & Blake S. X X X

(2001). EFFECTS OF
VELOCITY ON LOCALIZED
 MUSCLE FATIGUE DURING
ISOTONIC RESISTANCE
EXERCISE WITH A
CONSTANT TIME UNDER
TENSION. ​Physical Therapy,
(81)​5, A72. Retrieved from
go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.d
o?tabID=T002&resultListType
=RESULT_LIST&searchResult
sType=SingleTab&searchType
=AdvancedSearchForm&curren
tPosition=1&docId=GALE%7
CA75085647&docType=Abstr
act%2C+Brief+article&sort=Re
levance&contentSegment=&pr
odId=GPS&contentSet=GALE
%7CA75085647&searchId=R5
0&userGroupName=mari36952
&inPS=true
Filho J. C. J., Gobbi L. T. D., Gurjao x x x x
A. L. D., Gonclaves R., Prado
A., & Gobbi S. (2013). Effect
of different rest intervals,
between sets, on muscle
performance during leg press
exercise, in trained older
women. ​Journal of sports
science and medicine, (12)​1,
138-143. Retrieved from
 go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.d
o?tabID=T002&resultListType
=RESULT_LIST&searchResult
sType=SingleTab&searchType
=AdvancedSearchForm&curren
tPosition=2&docId=GALE%7
CA322330403&docType=Repo
rt&sort=Relevance&contentSeg
ment=&prodId=GPS&contentS
et=GALE%7CA322330403&se
archId=R51&userGroupName=
mari36952&inPS=true
Schmitz B., Rolfes F., Schelleckes K., x x x
Mewes M., Thorwesten L. & Kruger M.
(2018). Longer Work/Rest Intervals During
High-Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) Lead
to Elevated Levels of miR-222 and
miR-29c. Frontiers in Physiology. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.003
95
Meirelles C. M. & Gomes P. S. C. (2016). x X x
Effects of short-term carbohydrate
restrictive and conventional
hypoenergetic diets and resistance
training on strength gains and muscle
thickness. Journal of sports science and
medicine, (15)4, 578-584. Retrieved from
go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T
002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&search
ResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=Adva
ncedSearchForm&currentPosition=2&docI
d=GALE%7CA500969619&docType=Repor
t&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=&pro
dId=GPS&contentSet=GALE%7CA5009696
19&searchId=R55&userGroupName=mari
36952&inPS=true
Tomiya S., Kikuchi N., & Nakazato K. x x x X
(2017). Moderate intensity cycling
exercise after upper extremity resistance
training interferes response to muscle
hypertrophy but not strength gains.
Journal of sports science and medicine,
(16)3, 391-397. Retrieved from
go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=T
002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&search
ResultsType=SingleTab&searchType=Adva
ncedSearchForm&currentPosition=6&docI
d=GALE%7CA509470333&docType=Repor
t&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=&pro
dId=GPS&contentSet=GALE%7CA5094703
33&searchId=R57&userGroupName=mari
36952&inPS=true
Ratamess, N. A., Beller, N. A., Gonzalez, A. x X x
M., Spatz, G. E., Hoffman, J. R., & Ross, R.
E. (2017). The effects of multiple-joint
isokinetic resistance training on maximal
isokinetic and dynamic muscle strength
and local muscular endurance. Journal of
sports science and medicine, (15)1, 34-40.
Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?t
abID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&
searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType
=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=
13&docId=GALE%7CA500969372&docTyp
e=Report&sort=Relevance&contentSegme
nt=&prodId=GPS&contentSet=GALE%7CA
500969372&searchId=R1&userGroupNam
e=mari36952&inPS=true#
Rovny, D. (2006). Weight Training by x x x
Design: Create Your Own
Individualized Workout Plan
Using the Revolutionary BAM
Superset System. ​Physical
Therapy, (86)​11, 1570.
Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retri
eve.do?tabID=T002&resultList
Type=RESULT_LIST&search
ResultsType=SingleTab&searc
hType=AdvancedSearchForm&
currentPosition=19&docId=GA
LE%7CA156580337&docType
=Book+review&sort=Relevanc
e&contentSegment=&prodId=
GPS&contentSet=GALE%7CA
156580337&searchId=R2&user
GroupName=mari36952&inPS
=true
Fyfe, J. J., Bartlett, J. D., Hanson, E. D., x x x x
Stepto, N. K., & Bishop, D. J. (2016).
Endurance training intensity does not
mediate interference to maximal
lower-body strength gain during
short-term concurrent training. Frontiers
in Physiology. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.004
87
Catala, M. M., Schroll, A., Laube, G., $ x x
Arampatzis, A. (2018). Muscle Strength
and Neuromuscular Control in Low-Back
Pain: Elite Athletes Versus General
Population. Frontiers in Neuroscience.
Doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.004
36
Pallares, J. G. & Lillo-Bevia, J. R. (2018). x x
Validity and Reliability of the PowerTap P1
Pedals Power Meter. Journal of sports
science and medicine, (17)2, 305-314.
Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/retrieve.do?t
abID=T002&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&
searchResultsType=SingleTab&searchType
=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=
8&docId=GALE%7CA545431884&docType
=Report&sort=Relevance&contentSegmen
t=&prodId=GPS&contentSet=GALE%7CA5
45431884&searchId=R1&userGroupName
=mari36952&inPS=true
X
x x X

STEP 2: Look over your pre-planning Matrix and choose the best 10 articles​​ (mini 10 with 5 articles from the last 5 years). Complete a summary
of each relevant article you read using the Synthesis Matrix Analysis of Literature below:
Include the articles (the front page is important, but subsequent pages to be printed off should only be the pages that you cited in your synthesis
matrix) in your final copy – you need to make sure of the following:
a) Highlight​ on the original article - all the important facts that you have used in the matrix below.
b) When documenting, you also need to indicate which ​page number​ the information is found. The information on the synthesis matrix
should be the same as the ​highlighted section of the ​page number​ indicated​.
c) You do not have to reword/rewrite the sentence, merely document by rewriting the important bits and pieces of the information and
indicate where you found it and page #
d) Work steadily each day, if you work on 3-4 articles a day, you will complete this analysis before the deadline. Meticulous work at the
start will help you through this process easily.

Synthesis Matrix Analysis of Literature

Author/title, Purpose Framework Sample Design Variables/ Results Controversies, Limitations Implications
etc. instruments disagreements for practice,
with other research,
(APA format Overarching Hypothesis/ How the data Validity and How the authors theory
reference) Question Objective was Reliability hypothesis was
collected? supported/rejected
You will add a list of
Conclusion and authors referenced
in this section on a
further studies
separate page
​Henrik P., The We Sixteen Data are The system The results However, The Endurance
Lofving P, purpose hypothesiz male presente has been of the studies present and RT can
& Psilander of the ed that former d as the demonstrat present examining study was be
present high-volu high-leve mean [+ ed to have study these effects a relatively performed
N. (2018).
study was me CT l athletes or -] SD. a strong suggest that in individuals short on different
The Effect to would (ice-hock Repeate validity and highly with a long training days or on
of Two compare have a ey and d-measu test-retest strength-train history of interventio the same
Different the blunting rugby res reliability for ed resistance n (only 6 day, in
Concurrent effects of effect on players, analysis the individuals training (RT) weeks), different
Training concurren strength 27.3 [+ of estimation can improve are lacking. and it is training
Programs t training gains or -] 5.0 variance of vertical their Additionally, possible sessions or
on incorporat compared years) (2 x 2 jump height maximal few studies that a within the
Strength ing either to the participat mixed (Glatthorn strength by have longer same
low-volum effect of ed in the ANOVA) et al., concurrently examined training training
and Power e, low-volum study. was 2011). The undergoing how strength period is session.
Gains in high-inten e HIIT. They used to participants resistance and power needed to Also, RT can
Highly-Trai sity This were still test the performed and are affected observe be
ned interval hypothesis active interactio three endurance when different differences performed
Individuals. training was athletes n maximal training. types of between before or
Journal of (HIIT, informed who between unloaded Furthermore, endurance the RT + after
Sports 8-24 by a trained time jumps with the volume training are CT and RT endurance
Science Tabata meta-anal regularly (pre- and 30 s of and/or added to an + HIIT training. In
intervals ysis by but post-train passive intensity of RT protocol. groups. the present
and
at ~150% Wilson compete ing) and recovery the Another study, RT
Medicine​ , of and d interventi between endurance limitation was followed
17(​ 3), [VO.sub.2 colleagues sporadic on (RT + each effort. training does of the by
167-170. max]) or that ally. (p. CT and (p. 169) not appear to present endurance
Retrieved high-volu demonstra 167) RT + influence the study was training
from me, ted a HIIT magnitude of that it did within the
go.galegro medium-i negative group). this not include same
up.com/ps ntensity relationshi (p. 168) improvement a control training
/retrieve.d continuou p between because group that session. This
s endurance similar gains performed exercise
o?tabID=T enduranc training were only sequence
002&result e training volume observed for strength could in part
ListType=R (CT, and gains the RT + CT explain why
ESULT_LIST 40-80 min in muscle and RT + training. a relatively
&searchRe at 70% of hypertroph HIIT groups. (p. 167) large
sultsType= [VO.sub.2 y, (P. 169) strength
max]), on strength, improvement
SingleTab&
the and power was
searchType strength (Wilson et observed in
=Advanced and al., 2012). both the RT
SearchFor power of (p. 168) + CT and RT
m&current highly-trai + HIIT
Position=1 ned groups. (p.
&docId=GA individual 168)
LE%7CA54 s. (p. 167)
5431868&
docType=R
eport&sort
=Relevance
&contentS
egment=&
prodId=GP
S&content
Set=GALE%
7CA545431
868&searc
hId=R40&u
serGroupN
ame=mari3
6952&inPS
=true

Gao Z. to it was The The The Results, as This finding Surprisingl In summary,
(2008). examine hypothesiz setting students Chi-square presented in agrees with y, intention the findings
College the ed that for the were (degree of Table 2, the results of for future of this study
relationshi expectancy present asked to freedom indicated other studies participatio could
students'
ps -related study rate their and p that indicating that n was not enhance our
motivation between beliefs, was a ability value), CFI, importance importance significantl understandin
toward motivatio importanc beginning beliefs in GFI, and ([beta] = .29, was an y related to g of the
weight nal beliefs e, interest, weight weight RMSEA p < .05), important attendance factors
and usefulness, training training values we outcome predictor for .A determining
training: a
indices of self-efficac class at a using a obtained expectancy students' plausible students'
combined were ([beta] = future reason achievement
perspectiv achievem y, outcome southeast 5-point
ent expectancy ern scale. 158.32 (df= .27,p < .05), intention for might be behaviors.
e. ​Journal 58, p = .09), self-efficacy running that, They might
behaviors would be university They
of Sport .95, .94, ([beta] = .24, (Xiang et al., attendance also have
in a positively . were
Behavior, and .05, p < .05), and 2004a, 2005) had the implications
beginning related to Beginning asked, indicating expectancy-r and decision limited for
13(​ 1), Weight one weight "How
22-27. an elated beliefs to take variability instruction in
training another. training good at acceptable ([beta] = .20, physical due to the other
Retrieved class Second, it class is an this fit between p < .05) were education for-credit beginning
from among was elective activity the significant (Liu, 2006). nature of physical
go.galegro college hypothesiz course are you?" four-factor predictors for The result the course, activity
up.com/ps students. ed that for (1 = very model and students' also supports whereas classes such
/retrieve.d (p. 22) students' students bad, 5 = our data in intention for the previous intention as golf and
o?tabID=T importanc from all very this study. future evidence that for future tennis.
002&result e, interest, majors, good), Cronbach's participation self-efficacy/e participatio Continued
ListType=R usefulness and for "Compar alpha in weight xpectancy-rel n showed research is
ESULT_LIST and this study ed to coefficients training, and ated beliefs relatively needed to
outcome the other for the four accounted and outcome larger examine
&searchRe
expectancy classes (n students, scales were for 23.29% expectancy variability cost along
sultsType= .79, .79, of the can be good in this with the
SingleTab& would = 8) were how
.79, and variance. (p. predictors for study. (p. other three
searchType predict taught by good at
.81, 25) intention 25) task value
=Advanced their four this
demonstrati (Xiang et al., components,
intention instructor activity ng 2004a, 2005; to explore
SearchFor
for future s (one are you?" acceptable Moritz et al., the gender
m&current
participati female, (1 = one internal 2000; Bryan differences
Position=2 on. Third, three of the
&docId=GA reliability. & Rocheleau, concerning
it was males). worst, 5 = (p. 25) 2002; Trost et motivational
LE%7CA17 hypothesiz Each one of al., 2002). (p. beliefs and
5351090& ed that all instructor the best), 24) behaviors in
docType=R these had and weight
eport&sort motivation taught "Compar training, and
=Relevance al beliefs weight ed to examine the
&contentS would training other motivation of
predict classes in physical free-choice
egment=&
students' the activities, weight
prodId=GP training
S&content engageme semester how
nt in s prior to good at behavior
Set=GALE% among
weight the this
7CA175351 college
training study. (p. activity
090&searc students
class. 22) are you?" who are both
hId=R42&u Lastly, (1 = a lot
serGroupN motivated
expectancy worse in and
ame=mari3 -related this unmotivated
6952&inPS beliefs activity, 5 towards
=true along with = a lot exercise
self-efficac better in training
y would this programs.
emerge as activity). (p. 25)
predictors (p. 22)
of their
performan
ce. (p. 23)
Hessel A. Our Another study by performe Only one After 8 weeks Proposed Only one ecent
L., understan hypothesis English et d astronaut of training, explanations astronaut research also
Lindstedt ding of is that al. eccentric participated both for the participate demonstrate
S. L., & the force (2014), supine in the study, high-intensity protective d in the s the benefits
Nishikawa molecular enhancem four leg press and this eccentric effect of study, and of eccentric
K. C. mechanis ent groups of and calf astronaut training repeated this training for
(2017). ms of following athletes press only groups (100 eccentric astronaut numerous
concentric eccentric (10 in exercises performed and 138%) contractions only practical
Physiologic
contractio contractio each with the showed the (“the performed applications.
al
n has n may be group, 40 muscle exercises largest repeated-bout the These include
Mechanis advanced explained total) loads during the increases in effect”) exercises rehabilitation
ms of considera by performe equal to final leg strength include during the for sports
Eccentric bly since non-unifor d 0, 33, 66, 4-weeks of (a concentric changes in the final injuries,
Contractio the mities in eccentric 100, or his 6-month one-repetitio recruitment of 4-weeks of rehabilitation
n and Its advent of the force supine 138% of mission n maximum motor units his for persons
Application the sliding and length leg press their aboard the leg press) and with 6-month who are
s: A Role filament of muscle and calf concentri ISS. The only the subsequent mission intolerant of
for the theory, sarcomere press c tools 138% group exposures to aboard the traditional
Giant Titin whereas s (Morgan, exercises one-repe available to demonstrate eccentric ISS. The exercise, elite
mechanis 1990, with tition measure d an increase contractions, tools athletic
Protein.
ms for 1994). This muscle maximu muscle and in bone the available to training, and
Frontiers in
increased hypothesis loads m force. bone mineral elimination of measure training for
Physiology​. force resulted equal to After 8 properties density weak areas of muscle and astronauts
doi​: productio directly 0, 33, 66, weeks of were also (English et al., muscle fibers bone during space
http://dx.d n during from the 100, or training, limited. (p. 2014). These after an initial properties travel when
oi.org/10.3 eccentric failure of 138% of both 7) results exercise bout, were also the risks of
389/fphys. contractio cross-bridg their high-inte suggest that and the limited. (p. muscle and
2017.0007 n are only e models concentri nsity muscle forces development 7) bone atrophy
0 now to account c eccentric above the of more are high and
becoming for force one-repe training concentric resilient a premium is
clearer. enhancem tition groups one—repetiti muscle placed on
Eccentric ent (Harry maximu (100 and on maximum structures energy
contractio et al., m force. 138%) are necessary (Stauber, efficiency. (p.
ns play an 1990). The (p. 6) showed to stimulate 1989). 8)
important sarcomere the bone growth
role in length largest in healthy
everyday non-unifor increases individuals,
human mity in leg making
movemen theory strength high-intensity
ts, makes (a eccentric
including several concentri training the
mobility, predictions c exercise
stability, : one-repe regimen of
and sarcomere tition choice for
muscle length maximu astronauts
variability m leg
strength. will be press) during space
(p. 1) greater and only travel. (p. 6)
following the 138%
stretch group
than demonstr
during ated an
isometric increase
contractio in bone
n (p. 5) mineral
density
(English
et al.,
2014).
These
results
suggest
that
muscle
forces
above
the
concentri
c
one—rep
etition
maximu
m are
necessary
to
stimulate
bone
growth in
healthy
individual
 s, making
high-inte
nsity
eccentric
training
the
exercise
regimen
of choice
for
astronaut
s during
space
travel. (p.
6)
Filho J. C. J., The It was Seventee The Intra-class The ICC for Systematic A limitation The number
Gobbi L. T. purpose hypothesiz n older effects of correlation the 15 RM literature of our of
D., Gurjao of this ed that 1) women the RI on coefficient assessments reviews study was repetitions,
A. L. D., study was neither of (68.0 [+ the leg (ICC) was was 0.82 indicate that the use of a sustainability
Gonclaves to assess the RI or -] 5.9 press used to test (95% CI; 0.56 the single of
R., Prado A., the effect would years, exercise the to 0.93). No performance exercise in repetitions,
& Gobbi S. of promote 71.2 [+ or were reliability of significant of multiple the and total
(2013). different the -] 11.7 kg, examined the 15 RM difference sets is the experiment volume of
Effect of rest sustainabili 1.58 [+ or using a assessments was observed most effective al design. experimental
different intervals ty of -] 0.07 m) randomiz (number of (p > 0.05) in method for In older sessions
rest (RI) repetitions with ed and repetitions number of developing adults, a were
intervals, between , and 2) resistanc counterb multiplied repetitions muscular resistance significantly
between sets on that the e training alanced by load). In between the strength in training influenced by
sets, on number of longer RI experienc within-su addition, session resistance-trai program the RI,
muscle repetition would e (3.7 [+ bjects paired tests-retests. ned with between
performanc s, promote or -] 1.8 design. Student-/ Typical error individuals multiple sets, in
e during leg sustainabil the years) Muscle test and of (Peterson et exercises resistance-tra
press ity of achieveme participat performa typical error measuremen al., 2005; Rhea (major ined older
exercise, in repetition nt of a ed in the nce was of t was 0.97 et al., 2002). muscle women.
trained s, and greater study. All assessed measureme repetitions. When groups) is Neither RI
older total total participa via the nt for the Both RI multiple sets recommen appeared to
women. volume volume. (p. nts recording number of presented are performed ded in help the
Journal of during a 1) attended of repetitions significant to voluntary order to women
sports leg press a number were also reductions in exhaustion, provide an maintain
science and exercise. fully-supe of provided the with the overall sustainability
medicine, (p. 1) rvised repetitio (Hopkins, sustainability maintenance conditionin of repetitions
(12)1, resistanc ns, 2000). For of repetitions of a constant g stimulus in
from the first
138-143. e training sustainab all analyses, load (Chodzko-Z subsequent
to the
Retrieved program, ility of the level of throughout all ajko et al., sets.
second (p <
from with the repetitio significance 0.05), and to sets, the RI 2009). However, the
go.galegrou following ns, and was p < the third sets plays a key However, a sessions with
p.com/ps/re character total 0.05. (p < 0.05). A role in the single RI-3 reflected
trieve.do?ta istics: a) volume. Statistical significant performance exercise a greater
bID=T002&r occurred The procedures decrease (p of subsequent can be ability for the
esultListTyp three number were < 0.05) in the sets and in used to participants
e=RESULT_L days per of performed sustainability total volume assess the to maintain
IST&searchR week, on repetitio using the of repetitions (Garcia-Lopez effects of number of
esultsType= non-cons ns can [Statistica.su from the et al., 2008; resistance repetitions,
SingleTab&s ecutive vary with p.TM] second to Miranda et al., training on time of
earchType= days, b) different program, the third set 2007; 2009; muscle tension, and
AdvancedSe included moveme version 7.0. was Rahimi, 2005; performan total volume.
archForm&c eight nt (p. 5) observed Senna et al., ce (p. 7)
urrentPositi exercises velocities only for RI-3. 2008; (Izquierdo
on=2&docId of , which However, a Willardson et al.,
significantly
=GALE%7CA alternatin can affect and Burkett, 2009),
higher
322330403 g body the 2006a; while
sustainability
&docType= segments duration of repetitions 2006b). (p. 7) avoiding
Report&sort , of the set (p < 0.05) the effects
=Relevance including (Sakamot was of the
&contentSe the leg o and observed in order of
gment=&pr press, c) Sinclair, the second multiple
odId=GPS&c included 2006). and third exercises
ontentSet= three Thus, the sets when on number
GALE%7CA3 sets in duration the session of
22330403& which of each was repetitions
searchId=R5 participa set also performed (Miranda
1&userGrou nts was with RI-3. (p. et al.,
pName=mar achieved recorded. 6) 2010).
i36952&inP at least During Recently,
S=true 70% of the Miranda et
15 experime al. (2010)
maximu ntal demonstrat
m period of ed that a
repetitio the smaller
ns (RM), study, number of
and d) each repetitions
had participa is obtained
two-minu nt visited when the
te RI the exercise is
between laborator performed
sets. y a total at the end
Inclusion of five of, rather
criteria days than at the
for (separate onset of, a
participat d by session. In
ion in the periods addition,
study ranging the effect
were: age from 48 of exercise
[greater to 72 order on
than or hours). number of
equal to] The goal repetitions
60 years; of the was
no first stronger
contraind three when
ications sessions compared
involving (days 1, with RI. ( p.
the 2, and 3) 7)
cardiovas was to
cular determin
system, e the
muscles, optimum
joints, or loads
bones of with
the lower which the
limbs, as participa
well as nts could
neurologi perform
cal 15 RM. In
limitation the two
s to the experime
practice ntal
of sessions
resistanc (days 4
e and 5),
training. ( the
p. 3) depende
nt
variables
were
recorded
utilizing
one of
two
different
condition
s (three
sets with
a RI of 1
minute,
or of 3
 minutes).
(p. 3)
Schmitz B., This A second Initially, During In this Participants' Correlation First, our We conclude
Rolfes F., investigati objective 69 young the 1st 4-week ICRT exercise analysis of the findings that HIIT can
Schelleckes on of our healthy week, intervention data before 4 × 30 HIIT may not be induce
K., Mewes compared study was moderate participa study, we and after the group also directly increased
M., the effect to examine ly trained nts' analyzed the 4-week suggested translated miR-222 and
Thorwesten of two if a 4 × 30 female anthropo effect of training that acute to other miR-29c
L. & Kruger workload- HIIT and male metric two intervention changes in groups or levels in
M. (2018). matched interventio students data was workload-m are miR-222 were population healthy
Longer high-inten n would of the recorded atched HIIT presented in associated s as our females and
Work/Rest sity induce Universit using protocols on Table 3. No with an study males.
Intervals interval different y's standard exercise significant improvement involved Compared to
During training training Physical medical parameters difference of speed at young a 8 × 15 HIIT
High-Intensi (HIIT) adaptation Educatio equipme and existed IAT while both healthy protocol, a
ty Interval protocols s in n nt (Table circulating between the effects were female and workload-ma
Training with compariso Departm 1) and miR-222 and two HIIT not observed male tched 4 × 30
(HIIT) Lead different n to a time ent were participa -29c levels groups at in the 8 × 15 Caucasians. HIIT protocol
to Elevated recovery and recruited nts were in young baseline (all p HIIT group. Even if HIIT also induced
Levels of periods on workload at the familiariz healthy > 0.39). A Recent studies has also acute
miR-222 miR-222 matched 8 Institute ed with females and significant have already been miR-222 and
and and -29c × 15 HIIT of Sports the study males. In increase in suggested proposed miR-29c
miR-29c. levels. ( protocol. Medicine protocol brief, our speed at IAT that changes for patients elevations at
Frontiers in p.1) We of the and test main during ICRT in HIIT with baseline,
Physiology. hypothesiz Universit procedur findings are re-test was work/rest lifestyle-ind which were
doi: ed that y Hospital es. (1) speed at detected for ratios could uced associated
http://dx.do longer Muenster During IAT was the 4 × 30 induce chronic with
i.org/10.338 work/ rest in May the 2nd increased by HIIT group in different diseases improved
9/fphys.201 intervals of 2017 week, all a 4 × 30 but comparison physiological such as power
8.00395 the 4 × 30 (Figure participa not a 8 × 15 to the 8 × 15 adaptations coronary output at IAT
protocol 1). All nts HIIT HIIT group (Kavaliauskas artery at follow-up.
would investigat performe protocol, (2) which et al., 2015; disease or Thus,
induce ions were d a miR-222 and showed no Cipryan et al., heart miR-222 and
greater performe standardi -29c levels effect on 2016; Islam et failure it miR-29c may
improvem d in zed ICRT were speed at IAT al., 2017). ( p. may be help to
ent of accordan to elevated by (between-gro 7) detrimenta monitor HIIT
performan ce with determin a single up p < l for cardiac response in
ce the e session of 4 0.0132, insulin general and
parameter declarati baseline × 30 but not before vs. sensitivity to identify
s and on of individual 8 × 15 HIIT after and blood optimal
stronger Helsinki lactate at baseline, training). flow work/rest
effects on and after threshold (3) miR-222 Consistently, capacity as combinations
miR-222 the s, HR levels were 8 × 15 HIIT shown for . Moreover,
and -29c approval recovery still elevated participants healthy but miR-222 and
levels. (p. of the and by 4 × 30 reached the untrained miR-29c
2) local exercise HIIT at IAT at middle-age could
ethics capacity. follow-up follow-up at d men represent
committe In the 3rd while again lower HR (Eskelinen functional
e of the week, no effect compared to et al., markers for
medical participa was seen in the 4 × 30 2016). the
associatio nts the 8 × 15 HIIT group Second, optimization
n performe HIIT group, (between-gro the current of
Westfale d the first (4) resting up p < results are cardioprotect
n-Lippe HIIT miR-222 and 0.0232, based on ive HIIT
and the sessions -29c levels before vs. the regimes in
Westphal of the were after determinat primary and
ian 4-week increased training). ion of secondary
Wilhelms interventi after the Maximal circulating prevention.
-Universit on. The intervention exercise miRNAs Further
y of follow-up in both HIIT capacity from whole research is
Muenster ICRT was groups and (maximal blood and needed to
(project- performe (5) miR-222 speed) during the white show if
no. d 7 days and -29c ICRT re-test blood cell HIIT-induced
2013-231 after the levels were was number miR-222 and
-f-S, last not significantly has not -29c levels
study training increased increased in been are
acronym session at during both HIIT determine associated
SPORTIV identical incremental groups (both d. Even with
A). daytime. continuous p < 0.05, though structural
Written (p. 4) runs. (p. 5) before vs. only NK changes of
informed after cells seem the heart. (p.
consent training). to be a 8)
of While relevant
participa maximal HR source of
nts was was not miR-222
obtained significantly and -29c,
prior to different this
subjects' between limitation
participat baseline and might have
ion in the follow-up affected
study. (both p > our results
Inclusion 0.195, before to some
criteria vs. after extent.
were age training), a Furthermor
>18 strong e, as
years, a improvement miR-222
health of HR and
certificat recovery miR-29c
e as (HRmax - might be
necessary HR3min) concentrat
to study during ICRT ed in MVs
at the re-test was or
Universit detected for associated
y's both HIIT to carrier
Physical groups (both proteins
Educatio p ≤ 0.0002, with the
n before vs. potential to
Departm after shuttle into
ent and training). ( p. target cells,
valid 6) future
baseline studies
maximal should
 performa address the
nce effect of
exercise physical
tests (see exercise on
below). miRNA in
(p. 2) different
blood
component
s. (p. 7)
Meirelles C. The A Twentyo Muscle A registered The main Mitchell et al. A potential Data from
M. & Gomes purpose secondary ne thickness nutritionist result of this (1997) limitation this study
P. S. C. of this objective volunteer es were prescribed study was reported that to the indicate that
(2016). study was was to s measure the that, depletion of present overweight
Effects of to determine engaged d by structured irrespective muscle study was and obese
short-term compare the impact in an B-mode CONV diet of glycogen the fact individuals
carbohydrat the effects of an eight-we ultrasoun based on carbohydrate stores caused that submitted to
e restrictive of 8-week ek d (US) each content, the no volunteers resistance
and carbohydr program progressi using a individual's hypoenergeti impairment in could training while
conventiona ate on body ve RT 7.5 MHz nutritional c diets did strength select their undergoing a
l restrictive mass and program linear habits. The not impair performance own short-term
hypoenerge (CRD) and fat loss. It three transduc diet was strength of dietary hypoenergeti
tic diets and conventio was times per er designed to gains, and resistance-trai interventio c dietary
resistance nal hypothesiz week (Toshiba comprise the ned men. In n. Longer intervention
training on (CONV) ed that were Nemio[R] approximate volunteers addition, studies may be
strength diets CRD would assigned , Japan). ly 70% of an were able to Harber et al. using more capable of
gains and combined induce to a CRD The individual's maintain (2005) sophisticat gaining
muscle with RT on greater (< 30 g midpoint energy muscle showed that ed muscle
thickness. strength short-term carbohyd of the requirement thickness muscle methods to strength and
Journal of performan body rate; n = arm was s (Food and during protein monitor maintain
sports ce and weight 12; 30.7 determin Agriculture resistance synthesis changes in muscle
science and muscle loss, but [+ or -] ed by Organizatio training. might increase body thicknesses.
medicine, thicknesse both diets 3.9 km x anatomic n, 2004), Furthermore, even during a compositio Simultaneous
(15)4, s in would [m.sup.-2 al sites of with significant pronounced n are ly, the
578-584. overweigh maintain ]) or a the approximate similar reduction in needed to participants
Retrieved t and muscle COnV elbow ly 55% of reductions blood insulin clarify the experienced
from obese thickness (30% flexors the energy were concentration. effects of significant
go.galegrou participan and elicit energy and originating observed in It probably hypoenerg reductions in
p.com/ps/re ts already strength deficit; extensors from body mass occurs due to etic diets body mass
trieve.do?ta involved gains. (p. 55%, 15% , carbohydrat and body fat the increases combined and body fat,
bID=T002&r in RT 2) and 30% between es, 15% in both diet in growth with RT on regardless of
esultListTyp programs. energy the from groups. (p. 5) hormone the health their
e=RESULT_L (p. 1) from lateral proteins, secretion and carbohydrate
IST&searchR carbohyd border of and secondary to strength intake.
esultsType= rate, the approximate the normal or changes in These
SingleTab&s protein acromion ly 30% from higher protein obese and results may
earchType= and fat, and the fats contents of overweight be important
AdvancedSe respectiv humeral (Institute of prescribed people. (p. to alert
archForm&c ely; n=9; radial Medicine, diets. 4) health
urrentPositi 27.7 [+ or fossa. 2006). (p. 4) Moreover, professional
on=2&docId -] 2.5 km Body previous s that CRD
may be an
=GALE%7CA x mass, studies that
alternative
500969619 [m.sup.-2 standing tested the
intervention
&docType= ]). height, combined for treating
Report&sort Method: waist effects of RT these
=Relevance At girth, and and very low subjects, as
&contentSe baseline skinfolds energy diets long as there
gment=&pr and week were demonstrated is no specific
odId=GPS&c 8, the measure maintenance contraindicat
ontentSet= participa d by a of fat-free ion. (p. 5)
GALE%7CA5 nts certified mass
00969619& underwe anthropo (Donnelly et
searchId=R5 nt body metrist, al., 1993) and
5&userGrou compositi according hypertrophy
pName=mar on to in trained
i36952&inP assessme internati muscles
S=true nt by onal (Bryner et al.,
anthropo standards 1999) after 12
metry, develope weeks of diets
 measure d by the of only 800
ment of Internati kcal and
muscle onal approximately
thickness Society 100 g of
by for the carbohydrate
ultrasoun Advance daily. (p. 6)
d, and ment of
three Kinanthro
strength pometry
tests (Marfell-J
using ones et
isotonic al., 2006).
equipme (p. 2, 3)
nt. (p. 1)
Tomiya S., The The Fourteen All In the The data Alternatively, The Our results
Kikuchi N., purpose purpose of Japanese subjects present suggest that chronic present showed that
& Nakazato of the this study men performe study, the no adaptation of study has statistically
K. (2017). present was to (age: 22.0 d the test data again interaction the several significant
Moderate study was examine [+ or -] of 1RM indicate that effect was cardiovascular limitations. increases of
intensity to whether 0.7 years, using an systemic observed in system for The sample muscle CSA
cycling examine moderate height: arm-curl interference any of the aerobic size was (12.1% vs.
exercise the effect intensity 1.72 [+ or machine was outcome training might small. As a 5.0%) and
after upper of 30-min (55% -] 0.05 m, (Kikuchi observed measures. be due to result, the strength
extremity moderate [VO.sub.2 weight: et al., even when However, different chance of a (19.8% vs.
resistance intensity max], 30 62.1 [+ or 2015). the exercise moderate mechanisms. type II 24.3%) were
training cycling min) -] 5.8 kg, Using a consisted of intensity Pogliaghi et al. error observed in
interferes exercise cycling arm-curl 0.3 T moderate cycling (2006) occurring the SEP
response to immediat exercise 1RM: magnetic intensity exercise reported that might be versus CT
muscle ely after subsequen 22.3 [+ or resonanc (55% immediately 12week leg high. groups,
hypertrophy upper-bod t to -] 3.0 kg) e (MR) [VO.sub.2m after cycling Second, we respectively.
but not y upper-bod volunteer system ax]), long upper-body training in did not A recent
strength resistance y strength ed to AIRIS II duration (30 resistance healthy include a review
gains. training training participat (HITACHI min) cycling training elderly control indicated
Journal of on the influences e in this Tokyo, training influences subjects group or that
sports muscle the study. Japan), immediately the significantly strength interference
science and hypertrop training Subjects the CSAs after magnitude of elevated training effects of
medicine, hy and response were of the upper-body muscle [VO.sub.2peak only group. concurrent
(16)3, strength of muscle randomly elbow strength hypertrophy ] of arm Both training are
391-397. gain. (p. 1) hypertroph assigned flexion training; and relative cranking groups are associated
Retrieved y and to two muscles however, value of CSA exercise and necessary with training
from strength. groups. were duration changes due vice versa. The to clearly variants such
go.galegrou We One calculate and to systemic same investigate as exercise
p.com/ps/re hypothesiz group d using frequency of factors; this cross-transfer systemic modality,
trieve.do?ta ed that performe T1-weigh endurance effect was effects in interferenc frequency,
bID=T002&r moderate d ted training in not observed young men e in and duration
esultListTyp intensity moderate cross-sec the present if cycling and were also concurrent of endurance
e=RESULT_L endurance intensity tional study resistance reported by resistance training
IST&searchR exercise enduranc images of seemed to training were others (Tordi training (Wilson,
esultsType= subsequen e training the upper be low for performed on et al., 2001). and Marin et al.,
SingleTab&s t to immediat arm at [VO.sub.2m separate These authors endurance 2012). This
earchType= strength ely after 50% area ax] days. These discussed training. review also
AdvancedSe training resistanc between improveme results cardiovascular Lastly, the reported
archForm&c systemicall e training the nt (Swain et suggest that adaptation, exercise that, even if
urrentPositi y as lateral al., 2002). timing of especially in protocol interference
on=6&docId interferes concurre epicondyl These endurance central, which (arm-curl was
=GALE%7CA with nt e of the results training could may exercise) observed,
509470333 muscle training humerus might alter the contribute to was concurrent
&docType= hypertroph group (CT and the depend on a degree of the transfer minimal. It resistance
Report&sort y and group, n acromion higher muscular effect. could be and
=Relevance strength. = 7) and process magnitude growth assumed endurance
&contentSe (p. 2) the of the of blood induced by that training
gment=&pr second scapula flow resistance greater induced
odId=GPS&c group (spin redistributio training. ( p. interferenc statistically
ontentSet= performe echo n in 7) e would be significant
GALE%7CA5 d method; moderate found muscle
09470333& moderate repetitio intensity when hypertrophy,
searchId=R5 intensity n time, continuous higher strength, and
7&userGrou enduranc 700 ms; exercise, volume power. (p. 7)
pName=mar e training echo such as 30 protocols
i36952&inP and time, 20 min, are
S=true resistanc ms; slice compared employed,
e training thickness with the particularly
on and slice short involving
separate space, 10 duration of large,
days as mm). (p. repeated multi-joint
control 5) sprint movement
group exercise, s. In
(SEP even when present
group, n post-exercis study,
= 7) e oxygen there was
(Figure 1) consumptio no
(p. 3) n is statistically
included. (p. significant
5) difference
in the %
change in
1RM
between
groups, but
there was a
substantial
difference
in the
effect sizes
between
groups
(SEP, 0.91
vs. CT,
2.38). (p. 7)
Ratamess, The It was our Seventee In order The A significant In particular, It is These data
N. A., Beller, transfer of hypothesis n healthy to isokinetic time effect the potential important show that
N. A., training that 6 women examine device was observed for to view the multiple-joint
Gonzalez, A. effects of weeks of agreed to the produced in peak CON multiple-joint results of isokinetic
M., Spatz, multiple-j multiple-jo participat primary realtime (p = 0.003; isokinetic the present resistance
G. E., oint int e in the hypothesi force output [eta]2 = 0.47) resistance study training has
Hoffman, J. isokinetic isokinetic present s of the thereby and ECC (p = training to within the direct
R., & Ross, resistance resistance study present enabling the 0.04; [eta]2 = elicit transfer context of beneficial
R. E. (2017). training to training (Table 1). investigat subject to 0.46) force of training the study carryover
The effects dynamic alone None of ion, visualize where only effects to limitations. effects to
of exercise would the subjects effort and the IRT group non-isokinetic For dynamic
multiple-joi performan significantl women were adjust force showed measures of example, exercise
nt isokinetic ce remain y increase were randomly output significant muscle we only performance
resistance poorly free-weigh actively divided accordingly. increases for strength and investigate in addition to
training on understoo t (bench participat into an Peak CON the chest endurance d novice isokinetic
maximal d. Thus, press and ing in isokinetic and ECC press. A performance women strength
isokinetic the bent-over resistanc resistanc force was significant remains under with a gains. The
and purpose row) e training e training measured time effect studied. Pipes limited carryover
dynamic of the maximal prior to (IRT) before and was observed and Wilmore backgroun effects may
muscle present strength the group or after the in peak CON (1975) d in be attractive
strength study was and study. a training (p = 0.05; showed that resistance to strength
and local to upper-bod Seven of non-exer period and [eta]2 = 0.21) isokinetic training. training and
muscular investigat y local the cising each time and ECC (p = resistance Thus, conditioning
endurance. e the muscular subjects control subjects 0.04; [eta]2 = training multiple-joi professionals
Journal of magnitud endurance had no (CTL) came to the 0.27) force (including nt seeking to
sports e of in women. resistanc group. laboratory where only three isokinetic include
science and isokinetic This study e training The IRT after a the IRT group multiple-joint RT in isokinetic
medicine, and design experienc group general showed exercises) trained exercises into
(15)1, dynamic enabled us e under-we warm-up. significant significantly male and a resistance
34-40. one to whereas nt 6 Test-retest increases for increased female training
Retrieved repetition- investigate 10 weeks of reliability of the row. A isokinetic population program. (p.
from maximum the subjects training the significant (elbow s warrants 7)
http://go.ga (1RM) potential had (2 days dynamomet interaction flexion, further
legroup.co strength for previous per week er force was shown extension, study.
m/ps/retrie and local multiple-jo experienc on measures for ECC chest shoulder Future
ve.do?tabID muscular int e but had nonconse has been press (p = extension, research
=T002&resu endurance isokinetic not cutive established 0.0001; bench press at should also
ltListType=R increases resistance trained days) in our [eta]2 = 0.63) 24 and address
ESULT_LIST after 6 training to within a consistin laboratory and row peak 136[degrees]/ different
&searchRes weeks of increase 6-month g of 5 as r = 0.99 force (p = sec), isometric training
ultsType=Si multiple-j isokinetic period sets of (Hoffman et 0.001; [eta]2 (bench press, programs
ngleTab&se oint and prior to 6-10 al., 2011). = 0.59). A elbow flexion, at various
archType=A isokinetic dynamic initiating repetitio (p. 5) significant extension, linear
dvancedSea resistance muscular the ns at interaction knee velocities
rchForm&cu training. strength present 7585% of was also extension at in a
rrentPositio (p. 34) and study. subjects' shown for 90[degrees] comparativ
n=13&docId endurance Subjects peak CON the CON and e design.
=GALE%7CA performan underwe and ECC chest press (p 135[degrees]), We
500969372 ce. (p. 35) nt one strength = 0.003; and dynamic examined
&docType= week of for the [eta]2 = 0.48) leg press, only one
Report&sort familiariz isokinetic and row (p = bench press, program
=Relevance ation (2-3 chest 0.03; [eta]2 = arm curl, and utilizing a
&contentSe sessions) press and 0.29). No bent-over row slow
gment=&pr with seated significant 1RM strength. velocity
odId=GPS&c study row changes were (p. 3) (0.15 m x
ontentSet= procedur exercises observed in [s.sup.-1)]
GALE%7CA5 es prior at an the CTL with a
00969372& to testing average group. (p. 5) limited
searchId=R1 and linear intensity
&userGroup refrained velocity (75 to 85%)
Name=mari from all of 0.15 m and
36952&inPS other x repetition
=true# exercise [s.sup.-1] (6-10)
througho (3-sec range. In
ut the CON and addition,
experime 3-sec ECC new
ntal phases). dynamome
period. Peak CON ters have
(p. 4) and ECC been
force developed
during to utilize
 the chest other
press and multiple-joi
seated nts
row, 1RM exercises
bench (i.e. squat,
press and leg press)
bent-over in addition
row, and to the
maximu exercises
m utilized in
number the present
of study. (p.
push-ups 6)
performe
d were
assessed
pre and
post
training.
(p. 4)
Fyfe, J. J., Given the It was Twenty-t After Participants Total-study Moreover, a there is This is the
Bartlett, J. popularity hypothesiz hree prelimina were prescribed meta-analysis currently first
D., Hanson, and ed that, recreatio ry undertaking internal (Wilson et al., limited investigation
E. D., efficacy of compared nally-acti testing, recreational training load 2012) informatio to compare
Stepto, N. HIT for with RT ve males participa exercise (Figure 3C) identified n on the the effects of
K., & improving performed (mean ± nts were involving was higher greater effects of HIT and
Bishop, D. J. aerobic alone, (i) SD: age, ranked aerobic for both discrepancies incorporati work-matche
(2016). capacity concurrent 29.6 ± 5.5 by and/or HIT+RT (119 between ng HIT d MICT on
Endurance and training y; height, baseline resistance ± 44%; ES, concurrent compared adaptations
training metabolic incorporati 182.4 ± 1-RM leg exercise at 3.26 ± 0.84; P training and with MICT to maximal
intensity health ng either 5.9 cm; press least twice < 0.001) and single-mode into strength,
does not markers, HIT or body strength per week for MICT+RT RT in effect concurrent CMJ
mediate the aim of MICT mass, and >30 min, (108 ± 40%; sizes for training performance,
interference this study would 84.9 ± randomly and were ES, 3.28 ± lower-body programs. and lean
to maximal was to attenuate 11.4 kg) allocated free from 0.87; P < power Indeed, mass when
lower-body determine increases complete to one of any current 0.001) development studies performed
strength the effect in maximal d this three cardiovascul compared (0.55 vs. 0.91, independe concurrently
gain during of 8 weeks strength, investigat training ar with RT. respectively) ntly with RT. The
short-term of CMJ ion (see groups. abnormaliti There were compared examining main findings
concurrent concurren performan Table 3 Training es or also with the of this study
training. t training ce, and for groups musculoskel moderate differences in potential were that,
Frontiers in incorporat lean mass, baseline consisted etal injuries effects for effect sizes for role of compared
Physiology. ing either and (ii), character of (1) HIT to the upper higher total muscle endurance with RT
doi: HIT or this istics for cycling or lower study, hypertrophy training performed
http://dx.do more interferenc each combine extremity. non-prescrib (0.85 vs. 1.23, intensity alone,
i.org/10.338 traditional e effect training d with RT After being ed, internal respectively) upon concurrent
9/fphys.201 MICT on would be group). A (HIT+RT fully training load or maximal interferenc training
6.00487 maximal exacerbate flow group, n informed of (Figure 3C) strength (1.44 e during incorporating
strength, d when RT chart of = 8), (2) study for HIT+RT vs. 1.76, concurrent either HIT or
counter-m was the work-mat procedures compared respectively) training are work-matche
ovement combined progressi ched and with both RT development. scarce d MICT
jump with HIT, on of MICT screening (278 ± 624%; (p. 10) (Silva et al., cycling
(CMJ) compared participa cycling for possible ES, 0.94 ± 2012). (p. similarly
performan to with nts combine exclusion 0.92; P = 10) attenuated
ce, and MICT. through d with RT criteria, 0.077) and maximal
body Identificati initial (MICT+RT participants MICT+RT lower-body
compositi on of participa group, n provided (66.8 ± strength
on training nt = 7), and written 49.9%; ES, development
adaptatio variables screening (3) RT informed 0.81 ± 0.87; P and
ns, that are , group performe consent. All = 0.116). improvement
compared critical randomiz d alone procedures Total study s in peak CMJ
with mediators ation, (RT were combined force and
single-mo of the and to group, n approved by (i.e., power, while
de RT, in interferenc the final = 8). the Victoria prescribed + increases in
recreation e effect sample Measures University non-prescrib lower-body
ally-active will allow size of Human ed) internal lean mass
males. (p. for included aerobic Research training load were
1) targeted for each capacity, Ethics (Figure 3C) attenuated
exercise training maximal Committee. was higher with
prescriptio group is strength, (p. 4) for both concurrent
n to shown in and CMJ HIT+RT (173 training
minimize Figure 1. performa ± 72%; ES, incorporating
interferenc (p. 2) nce were 3.21 ± 0.84; P HIT, but not
e during obtained < 0.001) and MICT. (p. 9)
concurrent before MICT+RT
training. (PRE), (108 ± 70%;
(p. 1) mid-way ES, 1.94 ±
through 0.87; P =
(MID), 0.001)
and after compared
completi with RT.
on (POST) There was a
of the moderate
training effect for a
interventi higher
on total-study,
(Figure combined,
2). Body internal
compositi training load
on for HIT+RT
analysis compared
(DXA) with
was MICT+RT (24
performe ± 25%; ES,
d only at 0.73 ± 0.88; P
PRE and = 0.150). (p.
POST. At 7)
least 72 h
after
prelimina
ry
testing,
participa
nts
commenc
ed 8
weeks of
group-sp
ecific
training
performe
d three
times per
week.
After
training,
the first
post-train
ing test
[i.e., the
graded
exercise
test
(GXT)
performe
d at
POST]
was
undertak
en at
least 72 h
after the
final
training
session.
(p. 6)
Catala, M. The we Thirty Muscle The No significant Several review One Since the
M., Schroll, purpose hypothesiz elite strength positioning differences studies limitation etiology of
A., Laube, of the ed that LBP athletes was of the tables were present (Bolger et al., of this non-specific
G., $ study was in athletes and 29 measure was in the 2015; Jones et study was LBP is indeed
Arampatzis, to will not be age-matc d during standardize anthropomet al., 2016) the lack of multifactorial
A. (2018). investigat associated hed maximal d for all ric data revealed that EMG (Cholewicki
Muscle e the to a non-athle isometric participants between the the majority recordings et al., 2005),
Strength athletic-ba reduction tes with trunk in order to four groups of the of the this
and sed in muscle (15 flexion ensure of practitioners abdominal pathology is
Neuromusc specificity strength. athletes and trunk ecological participants recognize the muscles. not only
ular Control of muscle However, a and 15 extension validity, (Table 1). We benefits of Studies related to
in Low-Back strength direct non-athle contracti since usually found a strength from neuromuscul
Pain: Elite and transfer of tes) and ons. The situations in significant training in Cholewicki ar deficits.
Athletes neuromus muscle without neuromu daily life are pain effect on athletes, but et al. Psychosocial
Versus cular strength to low-back scular equal for all the maximum mainly focus (2002, factors like
General control of an efficient pain (15 control of individuals isometric on exercises 2005) using cognitive
Population. spine motor athletes spine independen trunk to strengthen similar beliefs,
Frontiers in stability in control of and 14 stability t of extension muscles which methods emotional
Neuroscienc chronic the spine non-athle was anthropome moments in are directly have states,
e. Doi: non-specif in tes) analyzed trical all three related to the shown the distress, or
http://dx.do ic response participat by measures. investigated specific abdominal social context
i.org/10.338 low-back to sudden ed in the determini The rhythm trunk athletic muscles also play an
9/fnins.201 pain. (p. 1) unexpecte study. (p. ng trunk of 12 positions, performance, shut-off important
8.00436 d 1) stiffness, cycles/minu indicating a downgrading latency to role related
perturbati trunk te (0.20 Hz) lower the be a to the
ons and/or damping, was given extension importance of significant appearance
control and by a strength in supplementar preexisting and
errors, onset metronome. LBP patients y trunk risk factor evolution of
which times of (p. 8) compared to stability or for the chronic LBP
actually the healthy trunk appearanc (Refshauge
can be lumbar controls (p = strengthening e of and Maher,
initiated and 0.013–0.023; exercises. (p. low-back 2006;
from thoracic effect size 12) injury. In Wippert et
deficits in erector η2 = the athlete al., 2017).
the spinae 0.091–0.108) population, These factors
perception muscles (Table 2). individuals were outside
and after However, for sustaining the scope of
processing sudden the isometric low-back the current
of sensory perturbat trunk flexion, injury study and
informatio ions no showed were not
n, is (quick pain-related latencies in considered in
questionab release significant average 14 the analysis.
le (Steele experime differences ms longer (p. 13)
et al., nts) as were found than those
2015). well as in both who did
Therefore, maximu athletes and not
we m non-athletes sustained
hypothesiz Lyapunov (p = any
ed an exponent 0.54–0.92). low-back
association s (local Athletes injury in a
of the dynamic showed prospective
deteriorati stability) significantly study
on in using (p = (Cholewicki
neuromusc nonlinear 0.001–0.009; et al.,
ular time effect size 2005). For
control of series η2 = the
spine analysis 0.132–0.186) assessment
stability of higher of muscle
with LBP in repetitive maximal onset
athletes. lifting extension times, we
(p. 2) moveme and flexion minimized
nts. Low moments the
back pain under both possible
was conditions methodolo
assessed (with and gical errors
using the without LBP) using cable
visual compared to EMG
analog non-athletes devices and
scale. We (Table 2). We using
found found no average
lower significant values of
maximal pain (p = five trials.
trunk 0.136) or Therefore,
extension group (p = we can
moments 0.477) effects assume
(p=0.03), on trunk that the
higher stiffness. found
trunk Trunk significant
damping damping was differences
(p=0.018) significantly were
and higher for the related to
shorter LBP the sample
onset participants characteris
times (p = 0.018; tics and not
(p=0.03) effect size to any
of the η2 = 0.097), methodolo
investigat but did not gical
ed trunk show any limitations.
muscles group by LBP (p. 10)
in interaction (p
low-back = 0.331)
pain indicating
patients similar
in both alterations in
athletes both athletes
and and
non-athle non-athletes
tes. (p. 1) (Table 3). We
also observed
a significant
pain effect on
the muscle
onset times
of the lumbar
(p = 0.019;
effect size
η2 = 0.073)
and thoracic
(p = 0.025;
effect size
η2 = 0.091)
erector
spinae
muscles,
evidencing
shorter
muscle
reaction
times after
release in the
LBP patients
of both
athlete and
non-athlete
groups (Table
3). No
significant
differences
were found
in the λmax
between
groups or LBP
conditions (p
= 0.395 and p
= 0.375,
respectively;
 Table 3). (p.
12)

STEP 3: References (From the Controversies, disagreements with other authors’ column)
*Note: Always in APA format

Loehr et al., (2011)

Shiba et al. (2015)

Edwards et al., (1984)

Garcia-Lopez et al., (2008); Miranda et al., (2007); (2009); Rahimi, (2005); Senna et al., (2008); Willardson and Burkett, (2006a; 2006b).

Kavaliauskas et al., (2015)​; Cipryan et al., (2016); Islam et al., (2017)

Mitchell et al. (1997) ​ Harber et al. (2005)

Donnelly et al., (1993) Bryner et al., (1999)

Pogliaghi et al. (2006) Tordi et al., (2001)

Pipes et al. (1975)

Bolger et al. (2015) Jones et al. (2016)