ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2025
The effects, mechanisms, and influencing factors of concurrent strength and endurance training with different sequences: a semi-systematic review.
Review in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Resistance Training for Cyclists: Scientific Evidence and Practical Recommendations.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2026Review
- Exercise and physical activity interventions in type 2 diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
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
objectiveThis study investigated how the sequencing of strength and endurance training affects athletic performance, and delved into the underlying mechanisms from the perspectives of neuromuscular and molecular adaptations. Furthermore, factors influencing the effectiveness of concurrent training with different sequences were also analyzed. DESIGN AND
methodsA semi-systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant literature was retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, and CNKI databases using the search terms: "concurrent training", "simultaneous training", "combined training", "concurrent strength and endurance training", "simultaneous strength and endurance training", "combined strength and endurance training", "sequence", "order". The retrieval timeframe was from January 1980 to December 2024.
resultsAnalysis of the 42 included studies revealed that, in human trials, while training sequence generally shows no consistent association with the ultimate gains in endurance, muscle hypertrophy, or maximal strength, adopting a "strength-first" modality optimizes neuromuscular adaptations, thereby enhancing relative strength and explosive power. Although acute molecular responses (e.g., mTOR/AMPK phosphorylation) exhibit sequence-dependent variations, their translation into long-term adaptations is complex and non-linear. Notably, animal experiments demonstrate a far more pronounced regulatory effect of training sequence on hypertrophy-related pathways than human studies, suggesting that species differences and training methodologies may be key contributing factors. RECOMMENDATIONS: The training sequence should be arranged reasonably based on the training objectives and the individual differences among the subjects (e.g., age, training status, sport modality). If the endurance-strength training mode is chosen, it is recommended that the interval between the two types of training be more than 3 h to prevent acute molecular interference. For athletes targeting explosive power or relative strength, the strength-endurance sequence is preferred.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.