Reliability of meta-analyses to evaluate resistance training programmes

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Deutscher übersetzter Titel:Reliabilität einer Meta-Analyse zur Bewertung von Krafttrainingsprogrammen
Autor:Arruda, Antonio; Souza, Daniel; Steele, James; Fisher, James; Gießing, Jürgen; Gentil, Paulo
Erschienen in:Journal of sports sciences
Veröffentlicht:35 (2017), 20, S. 1982-1984, Lit.
Format: Literatur (SPOLIT)
Publikationstyp: Zeitschriftenartikel
Medienart: Elektronische Ressource (online) Gedruckte Ressource
Sprache:Englisch
ISSN:0264-0414, 1466-447X
DOI:10.1080/02640414.2016.1243799
Schlagworte:
Online Zugang:
Erfassungsnummer:PU201707005476
Quelle:BISp

Abstract des Autors

In conclusion, considering the large number of variables involved in resistance training and the methodological inconsistencies in the current literature, it seems impossible to make comparisons of different studies or include different studies in the same analysis. For a meta-analysis to be valid, a large amount of data on homogeneous subgroups should accumulate for topics where there is strong consensus about which variables have theoretical importance, and this does not seem to be the case for resistance training studies. Because of this, the generalisation of meta-analyses should be viewed with caution until we have a large number of studies providing adequate control of variables. Rather than prematurely perform meta-analyses on differing resistance training variables, which are all hindered by the inherent limitations of meta-analyses (Shapiro, 1994) including low study numbers and study heterogeneity (Field, 2015), and serve only to reduce the complexity of resistance training variables to a single statistic, greater value can be obtained by designing and conducting studies of larger and homogenous samples that can adequately address the topics considered. Otherwise, we can be comparing oranges with apples or, worse, we can be assuming that oranges and apples are the same.