Resistance Training & Hypertrophy — References

Navigation

Parent Topic: Resistance Training & Hypertrophy | References Hub: 01 - Foundations References MOC

---

Primary Literature & Landmark Studies

Schoenfeld et al. (2017a)

• Citation: Schoenfeld, B. J., Ogborn, D., & Krieger, J. W. (2017). Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and increases in muscle mass: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sports Sciences, 35(11), 1073–1082.
• Identifiers: DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1210197 (DOI · SciDB · Scholar) | PMID: 27433992 (PubMed · Europe PMC)
• Study Design: Systematic review and meta-regression of 15 randomized controlled trials (34 treatment groups) comparing lower vs. higher weekly resistance training set volume per muscle group.
• Key Quantitative Outcomes:
  • Identified a statistically significant graded dose-response relationship between weekly set volume and skeletal muscle hypertrophy ($p=0.002$), with each additional weekly set associated with an increase in effect size of $0.023$ (+0.37% gain).
  • Categorical analysis showed 10+ sets/muscle/week produced 9.8% muscle growth ($\text{ES}=0.520$), compared to 6.6% for 5–9 sets ($\text{ES}=0.409$) and 5.4% for $<5$ sets ($\text{ES}=0.307$).

Schoenfeld et al. (2017b)

• Citation: Schoenfeld, B. J., Grgic, J., Ogborn, D., & Krieger, J. W. (2017). Strength and hypertrophy adaptations between low- vs. high-load resistance training: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 31(12), 3508–3523.
• Identifiers: DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002200 (DOI · SciDB · Scholar) | PMID: 28834797 (PubMed · Europe PMC)
• Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of 21 studies comparing low-load ($\le 60\%\text{1RM}$) vs. high-load ($>60\%\text{1RM}$) resistance training performed to momentary muscular failure.
• Key Quantitative Outcomes:
  • Dynamic 1RM strength gains were significantly greater with high-load training ($\text{ES}=0.58\pm 0.14,95\%\text{CI}[0.28,0.89],p=0.003$; +35.3% vs. +28.0%).
  • Muscle hypertrophy was statistically equivalent across low-load and high-load conditions ($\text{ES}=0.03\pm 0.06,95\%\text{CI}[-0.08,0.14],p=0.65$; +8.3% vs. +7.0%) when sets were taken near failure.

Schoenfeld et al. (2021)

• Citation: Grgic, J., Schoenfeld, B. J., Orazem, J., & Sabol, F. (2022 / Epub 2021). Effects of resistance training performed to repetition failure or non-failure on muscular strength and hypertrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 11(2), 202–211.
• Identifiers: DOI: 10.1016/j.jshs.2021.01.007 (DOI · SciDB · Scholar) | PMID: 33497853 (PubMed · Europe PMC)
• Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of 15 randomized trials comparing resistance training performed to momentary repetition failure vs. non-failure (typically 1–3 repetitions in reserve).
• Key Quantitative Outcomes:
  • When training volume was equated between groups, no statistically significant differences were observed between failure and non-failure training for muscular strength ($\text{ES}=-0.09,95\%\text{CI}[-0.22,0.05],p=0.22$) or muscle hypertrophy ($\text{ES}=0.06,95\%\text{CI}[-0.15,0.26],p=0.59$), demonstrating that stopping 1–3 reps shy of failure maximizes adaptations while minimizing neuromuscular fatigue.

Momma et al. (2022)

• Citation: Momma, H., Kawakami, R., Honda, T., & Sawada, S. S. (2022). Muscle-strengthening activities are associated with lower risk and mortality in major non-communicable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 56(13), 755–763.
• Identifiers: DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2021-105061 (DOI · SciDB · Scholar) | PMID: 35228201 (PubMed · Europe PMC)
• Study Design: Systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of 16 prospective cohort studies ($N=479,856$ adults).
• Key Quantitative Outcomes:
  • Muscle-strengthening activities were associated with a 15% lower risk of all-cause mortality ($\text{RR}=0.85,95\%\text{CI}[0.79,0.93]$), 17% lower risk of cardiovascular disease, 12% lower risk of total cancer, and 17% lower risk of diabetes.
  • Combining muscle-strengthening and aerobic activities conferred a 40% lower risk of all-cause mortality ($\text{RR}=0.60,95\%\text{CI}[0.54,0.67]$) and a 46% lower risk of CVD mortality.