A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training

Background: Many reports describe statistical approaches for estimating interindividual differences in trainability and classifying individuals as “responders” or “non-responders.” The extent to which studies in the exercise training literature have adopted these statistical approaches remains uncle...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jacob T. Bonafiglia, Nicholas Preobrazenski, Brendon J. Gurd
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:	individual response interindividual variability trainability exercise training responders non-responder analysis Physiology QP1-981
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/eebf79da518f47cea71b68d72f33e92d
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:eebf79da518f47cea71b68d72f33e92d
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:eebf79da518f47cea71b68d72f33e92d2021-11-08T05:41:16ZA Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training1664-042X10.3389/fphys.2021.665044https://doaj.org/article/eebf79da518f47cea71b68d72f33e92d2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2021.665044/fullhttps://doaj.org/toc/1664-042XBackground: Many reports describe statistical approaches for estimating interindividual differences in trainability and classifying individuals as “responders” or “non-responders.” The extent to which studies in the exercise training literature have adopted these statistical approaches remains unclear.Objectives: This systematic review primarily sought to determine the extent to which studies in the exercise training literature have adopted sound statistical approaches for examining individual responses to exercise training. We also (1) investigated the existence of interindividual differences in trainability, and (2) tested the hypothesis that less conservative thresholds inflate response rates compared with thresholds that consider error and a smallest worthwhile change (SWC)/minimum clinically important difference (MCID).Methods: We searched six databases: AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, and SportDiscus. Our search spanned the aerobic, resistance, and clinical or rehabilitation training literature. Studies were included if they used human participants, employed standardized and supervised exercise training, and either: (1) stated that their exercise training intervention resulted in heterogenous responses, (2) statistically estimated interindividual differences in trainability, and/or (3) classified individual responses. We calculated effect sizes (ESIR) to examine the presence of interindividual differences in trainability. We also compared response rates (n = 614) across classification approaches that considered neither, one of, or both errors and an SWC or MCID. We then sorted response rates from studies that also reported mean changes and response thresholds (n = 435 response rates) into four quartiles to confirm our ancillary hypothesis that larger mean changes produce larger response rates.Results: Our search revealed 3,404 studies, and 149 were included in our systematic review. Few studies (n = 9) statistically estimated interindividual differences in trainability. The results from these few studies present a mixture of evidence for the presence of interindividual differences in trainability because several ESIR values lay above, below, or crossed zero. Zero-based thresholds and larger mean changes significantly (both p < 0.01) inflated response rates.Conclusion: Our findings provide evidence demonstrating why future studies should statistically estimate interindividual differences in trainability and consider error and an SWC or MCID when classifying individual responses to exercise training.Systematic Review Registration: [website], identifier [registration number].Jacob T. BonafigliaNicholas PreobrazenskiBrendon J. GurdFrontiers Media S.A.articleindividual responseinterindividual variabilitytrainabilityexercise trainingrespondersnon-responder analysisPhysiologyQP1-981ENFrontiers in Physiology, Vol 12 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	individual response interindividual variability trainability exercise training responders non-responder analysis Physiology QP1-981
spellingShingle	individual response interindividual variability trainability exercise training responders non-responder analysis Physiology QP1-981 Jacob T. Bonafiglia Nicholas Preobrazenski Brendon J. Gurd A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training
description	Background: Many reports describe statistical approaches for estimating interindividual differences in trainability and classifying individuals as “responders” or “non-responders.” The extent to which studies in the exercise training literature have adopted these statistical approaches remains unclear.Objectives: This systematic review primarily sought to determine the extent to which studies in the exercise training literature have adopted sound statistical approaches for examining individual responses to exercise training. We also (1) investigated the existence of interindividual differences in trainability, and (2) tested the hypothesis that less conservative thresholds inflate response rates compared with thresholds that consider error and a smallest worthwhile change (SWC)/minimum clinically important difference (MCID).Methods: We searched six databases: AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, and SportDiscus. Our search spanned the aerobic, resistance, and clinical or rehabilitation training literature. Studies were included if they used human participants, employed standardized and supervised exercise training, and either: (1) stated that their exercise training intervention resulted in heterogenous responses, (2) statistically estimated interindividual differences in trainability, and/or (3) classified individual responses. We calculated effect sizes (ESIR) to examine the presence of interindividual differences in trainability. We also compared response rates (n = 614) across classification approaches that considered neither, one of, or both errors and an SWC or MCID. We then sorted response rates from studies that also reported mean changes and response thresholds (n = 435 response rates) into four quartiles to confirm our ancillary hypothesis that larger mean changes produce larger response rates.Results: Our search revealed 3,404 studies, and 149 were included in our systematic review. Few studies (n = 9) statistically estimated interindividual differences in trainability. The results from these few studies present a mixture of evidence for the presence of interindividual differences in trainability because several ESIR values lay above, below, or crossed zero. Zero-based thresholds and larger mean changes significantly (both p < 0.01) inflated response rates.Conclusion: Our findings provide evidence demonstrating why future studies should statistically estimate interindividual differences in trainability and consider error and an SWC or MCID when classifying individual responses to exercise training.Systematic Review Registration: [website], identifier [registration number].
format	article
author	Jacob T. Bonafiglia Nicholas Preobrazenski Brendon J. Gurd
author_facet	Jacob T. Bonafiglia Nicholas Preobrazenski Brendon J. Gurd
author_sort	Jacob T. Bonafiglia
title	A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training
title_short	A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training
title_full	A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training
title_fullStr	A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training
title_full_unstemmed	A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training
title_sort	systematic review examining the approaches used to estimate interindividual differences in trainability and classify individual responses to exercise training
publisher	Frontiers Media S.A.
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/eebf79da518f47cea71b68d72f33e92d
work_keys_str_mv	AT jacobtbonafiglia asystematicreviewexaminingtheapproachesusedtoestimateinterindividualdifferencesintrainabilityandclassifyindividualresponsestoexercisetraining AT nicholaspreobrazenski asystematicreviewexaminingtheapproachesusedtoestimateinterindividualdifferencesintrainabilityandclassifyindividualresponsestoexercisetraining AT brendonjgurd asystematicreviewexaminingtheapproachesusedtoestimateinterindividualdifferencesintrainabilityandclassifyindividualresponsestoexercisetraining AT jacobtbonafiglia systematicreviewexaminingtheapproachesusedtoestimateinterindividualdifferencesintrainabilityandclassifyindividualresponsestoexercisetraining AT nicholaspreobrazenski systematicreviewexaminingtheapproachesusedtoestimateinterindividualdifferencesintrainabilityandclassifyindividualresponsestoexercisetraining AT brendonjgurd systematicreviewexaminingtheapproachesusedtoestimateinterindividualdifferencesintrainabilityandclassifyindividualresponsestoexercisetraining
_version_	1718442961048436736

A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training

Ejemplares similares