ArticleJSAMS plus2025
Effects of isometric vs. dynamic resistance training on muscle performance and body composition: Protocol for a pilot study.
Article in JSAMS plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Focus on female athletes and special issue on physical activity in people with disability.JSAMS plus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Isometric resistance training (ISO-RT) has gained renewed attention for its potential to elicit muscular adaptations and enhance athletic performance. Unlike dynamic resistance training (DYN-RT), ISO-RT involves no joint movement or eccentric loading, making it particularly suitable for individuals with joint pathologies or those undergoing rehabilitation. Despite increasing interest, the comparative effectiveness of ISO-RT versus DYN-RT across various outcomes, including strength, hypertrophy, endurance, and recovery, remains inadequately explored. Aims: This study aims to evaluate and compare the effects of multi-angle ISO-RT and traditional DYN-RT on muscle performance, body composition, and recovery-related indicators in healthy adults. Methods: In this pilot randomised controlled trial, 20 healthy adults (≥18 years) will be randomly assigned to either the ISO-RT or DYN-RT group (n = 10 per group). Both groups will complete a full-body resistance training program twice weekly for six weeks. The key distinction lies in the execution of the chest press and leg press exercises-performed isometrically in the ISO-RT group and dynamically in the DYN-RT group. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Analysis: Primary outcomes include dynamic and isometric strength. Secondary outcomes encompass muscular power, dynamic and isometric endurance, body composition (via dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), muscle oxygenation (via near-infrared spectroscopy), and subjective recovery indicators such as sleep quality and delayed onset muscle soreness. Between-group comparisons will be conducted using appropriate inferential statistical tests to determine effect estimates and feasibility metrics. Discussion/implications: This trial will offer preliminary insights into the physiological and perceptual adaptations elicited by ISO-RT versus DYN-RT. The findings will inform the design of larger-scale trials and contribute to developing tailored, evidence-based resistance training guidelines for both clinical and athletic populations.
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.