Linear sprinting speed is an essential physical quality for many athletes. There are a number of different training modalities that can be used to improve sprint performance. Strength and conditioning coaches must select the most appropriate modalities for their athletes, taking into consideration the sprint distances that typically occur during competition. The study purpose was to perform a brief review as to the effect of specific (free sprinting; resisted sprinting by sleds, bands, or incline running; assisted sprinting with a towing device or a downhill slope), nonspecific (resistance and plyometric training), and combined (a combination of specific and nonspecific) training methods on different sprint distances (0-10, 0-20, 0-30, and 31+ m). A total of 48 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, resulting in 1,485 subjects from a range of athletic backgrounds. The training effects associated with specific sprint training were classified as moderate (effect size [ES] = -1.00; %change = -3.23). Generally, the effect of specific sprint training tended to decrease with distance, although the largest training effects were observed for the 31+ m distance. The greatest training effects (ES = -0.43; %change = -1.65) of nonspecific training were observed for the 31+ m distance. The combined training revealed greatest effects (ES = -0.59; %change = -2.81) for the 0-10 m distance. After this review, specific sprint training methods seem the most beneficial over the investigated distances. However, the implementation of nonspecific training methods (e.g., strength and power training) could also benefit speed and athletic performance.

Effect of Different Sprint Training Methods on Sprint Performance Over Various Distances: A Brief Review.

The effect of resistance training (RT) on adaptations in muscular strength and hypertrophy has never been examined in an exclusively female synthesis of the literature. The objectives of this study were threefold: (1) to systematically review the literature on female adaptations to RT, characterising the effect in terms of muscular strength and hypertrophy; (2) to distinguish the individual effects of intervention duration, frequency, and intensity on these adaptations via sub-analysis; (3) to draw evidence-based conclusions regarding training expectations in female populations. Three electronic databases were searched using terms related to RT combined with females or women. Random-effects meta-analyses were undertaken to estimate the effect of RT on muscular strength and hypertrophy in females. Possible predictors that may have influenced training-related effects (e.g., training intensity and volume) were explored using univariate analyses. The systematic search identified 14,067 articles of which a total of 24 studies met the inclusion criteria and were eligible. Upper body strength was assessed in 15 studies, lower body strength in 19 studies, and muscular hypertrophy in 15 studies. Study duration lasted between 4 weeks and 12 months. Large-effect sizes were found for upper body strength (Hedges’ g = 1.70; p < 0.001) and lower body strength (Hedges’ g = 1.40; p < 0.001). Following use of the Trim and Fill method (due to presence of publication bias), a large effect still remained for upper body strength (Hedges’ g = 1.07), although a medium effect was found for lower body strength (Hedges’ g = 0.52). A medium effect was found for muscular hypertrophy (g = 0.52, p = 0.002). Sub-analyses revealed that the moderating variables “training frequency” and “training volume” significantly influenced lower body muscular strength (p < 0.001). “Training frequency” and “sets per exercise” moderated the RT effects on upper body strength (p < 0.01). No moderating variables were found to significantly influence muscular hypertrophy. A trend for a moderating effect on upper body strength was found for “age of participants” (p = 0.08), whereby younger participants experienced a greater effect. A moderating effect was also observed where supervised training had a larger influence on the adaptation of lower body strength (p = 0.05) compared with unsupervised training. Methodological quality for the studies included in the review was found to be moderate. RT elicits large improvements in muscular strength and hypertrophy in healthy adult females. Training volume and frequency appear to be important variables that influence muscular strength.

The Effect of Resistance Training in Women on Dynamic Strength and Muscular Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

Abstract Background Although it is known that resistance training can be as effective as stretch training to increase joint range of motion, to date no comprehensive meta-analysis has investigated the effects of resistance training on range of motion with all its potential affecting variables. Objective The objective of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of chronic resistance training on range of motion compared either to a control condition or stretch training or to a combination of resistance training and stretch training to stretch training, while assessing moderating variables. Design For the main analysis, a random-effect meta-analysis was used and for the subgroup analysis a mixed-effect model was implemented. Whilst subgroup analyses included sex and participants’ activity levels, meta-regression included age, frequency, and duration of resistance training. Data Sources Following the systematic search in four databases (PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) and reference lists, 55 studies were found to be eligible. Eligibility Criteria Controlled or randomized controlled trials that separately compared the training effects of resistance training exercises with either a control group, stretching group, or combined stretch and resistance training group on range of motion in healthy participants. Results Resistance training increased range of motion (effect size [ES] = 0.73; p &lt; 0.001) with the exception of no significant range of motion improvement with resistance training using only body mass. There were no significant differences between resistance training versus stretch training (ES = 0.08; p = 0.79) or between resistance training and stretch training versus stretch training alone (ES = − 0.001; p = 0.99). Although “trained or active people” increased range of motion (ES = 0.43; p &lt; 0.001) “untrained and sedentary” individuals had significantly ( p = 0.005) higher magnitude range of motion changes (ES = 1.042; p &lt; 0.001). There were no detected differences between sex and contraction type. Meta-regression showed no effect of age, training duration, or frequency. Conclusions As resistance training with external loads can improve range of motion, stretching prior to or after resistance training may not be necessary to enhance flexibility. 

/pdf/resistance-training-induces-improvements-in-range-of-motion-2ffk9irt.pdf

Resistance Training Induces Improvements in Range of Motion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of twelve weeks of resistance training with different exercise orders (upper limbs and lower limbs vs. lower limbs and upper limbs) on flexibility levels in elite judo athletes. Thirty-nine male athletes were randomly divided into 3 groups as follows: G1 (n = 13), G2 (n = 13), and CG (n = 13). The flexibility was assessed on 8 joint movements: shoulder flexion and shoulder extension, shoulder abduction and shoulder adduction, trunk flexion and trunk extension, and hip flexion and hip extension. Two-way repeated measures ANOVAs (time [pre-experimental vs. post-experimental] × group [G1 vs. G2 vs. CG]) were used to compare the differences between pre- and post-test situations and the differences among groups. The results from the within-group (pre vs. post) comparisons demonstrated significant increases (p 0.05) were observed for the CG. The results from the between-group comparisons demonstrated no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the range of motion between G1post vs. G2post (1.15%). Although both exercise orders (from upper to lower limbs and from lower to upper limbs) increased flexibility, no significant variations were observed between the different exercise orders. Nevertheless, these findings demonstrate that flexibility gains could be obtained with a resistance training program, and thus, more time can be devoted to sports-specific judo training.

/pdf/chronic-effects-of-different-resistance-training-exercise-llnnz0cb5k.pdf

Chronic Effects of Different Resistance Training Exercise Orders on Flexibility in Elite Judo Athletes

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of six months of training with three different number of sets of resistance training on flexibility in young men. Forty-seven men (mean ± SD age = 24 ± 1yrs; body mass = 79.39 ± 9.12 kg; height = 174.5 ± 5.6 cm) were randomly divided into three training groups performing either one set (G1S), three sets (G3S), or five sets (G5S) of all exercises in a resistance training session or a control group (CG). All groups were assessed pre- and post-training for Sit-and-Reach test and range of motion of 10 joints using goniometry. The training protocol included three weekly sessions and was composed of nine exercises performed at a moderate intensity (eight to 12RM). The results demonstrated significant differences pre- to post-training for the Sit-and-Reach test for all training groups; however, only the G5S showed significant differences when compared to the CG (31.04 ± 5.94cm vs. 23.56 ± 6.76cm, respectively; p < 0.05). Of the ten joint movements measured, there were range of motion increases only to shoulder flexion (G1S), shoulder extension (G3S), elbow flexion (G3S), and knee flexion (G3S) when comparing pre- to post-training (p < 0.05). In conclusion, different resistance training volumes improved flexibility for some joints of young men. These findings indicate that performing only resistance training can result in increases in flexibility.

/pdf/effects-of-different-number-of-sets-of-resistance-training-1dy1c2ndd0.pdf

Effects of Different Number of Sets of Resistance Training on Flexibility.

This study compared SuperSlow resistance training (SRT) to traditional resistance training (TRT) during early phase adaptations in strength, aerobic capacity, and flexibility in college-aged women. Subjects were randomly assigned to SRT (n = 14); TRT (n = 13); or control (CON; n = 8) groups. To equalize training times, TRT trained 3 times per week for 25 minutes each session, whereas SRT trained twice a week for 35 minutes each session. Both groups trained for 4 weeks, whereas the CON group maintained normal daily activities. Workouts consisted of 5 exercises: shoulder press, chest press, leg press, low row, and lat pull down. The SRT group completed 1 set of each exercise at 50% 1RM until momentary failure with a 10-second concentric and a 10-second eccentric phase. The TRT group completed 3 sets of 8 repetitions at 80% 1RM for each exercise, with 4 seconds of contraction time for each repetition. Groups were statistically similar at baseline. There was a significant (p ≤ 0.01) time main effect for flexibility with the greatest improvements occurring for the training groups (SRT 14.7% and TRT 11%). All strength tests had significant (p ≤ 0.01) time main effects but no group or group by time interactions. Both training groups had large percent improvements in strength compared to CON, but the large variability associated with the SRT group resulted in only the TRT group being significantly different from the CON group. In conclusion, percent improvements were similar for the TRT and SRT groups, but only the TRT group reached statistical significance for the strength improvements, and both groups were equally effective for improving flexibility.

Effects of 4 weeks of traditional resistance training vs. superslow strength training on early phase adaptations in strength, flexibility, and aerobic capacity in college-aged women.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Alexis Dear

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Effects of 4 weeks of traditional resistance training vs. superslow strength training on early phase adaptations in strength, flexibility, and aerobic capacity in college-aged women.