N of 1:优化方法,检测阻力训练中的个体反应差异

IF 9.3 1区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Zac P. Robinson, Eric R. Helms, Eric T. Trexler, James Steele, Michael E. Hall, Chun-Jung Huang, Michael C. Zourdos
{"title":"N of 1:优化方法,检测阻力训练中的个体反应差异","authors":"Zac P. Robinson, Eric R. Helms, Eric T. Trexler, James Steele, Michael E. Hall, Chun-Jung Huang, Michael C. Zourdos","doi":"10.1007/s40279-024-02050-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Most resistance training research focuses on inference from average intervention effects from observed group-level change scores (i.e., mean change of group A vs group B). However, many practitioners are more interested in training responses (i.e., causal effects of an intervention) on the individual level (i.e., causal effect of intervention A vs intervention B for individual X). To properly examine individual response variation, multiple confounding sources of variation (e.g., random sampling variability, measurement error, biological variability) must be addressed. Novel study designs where participants complete both interventions and at least one intervention twice can be leveraged to account for these sources of variation (i.e., <i>n</i> of 1 trials). Specifically, the appropriate statistical methods can separate variability into the signal (i.e., participant-by-training interaction) versus the noise (i.e., within-participant variance). This distinction can allow researchers to detect evidence of individual response variation. If evidence of individual response variation exists, researchers can explore predictors of the more favorable intervention, potentially improving exercise prescription. This review outlines the methodology necessary to explore individual response variation to resistance training, predict favorable interventions, and the limitations thereof.</p>","PeriodicalId":21969,"journal":{"name":"Sports Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":9.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"N of 1: Optimizing Methodology for the Detection of Individual Response Variation in Resistance Training\",\"authors\":\"Zac P. Robinson, Eric R. Helms, Eric T. Trexler, James Steele, Michael E. Hall, Chun-Jung Huang, Michael C. Zourdos\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40279-024-02050-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Most resistance training research focuses on inference from average intervention effects from observed group-level change scores (i.e., mean change of group A vs group B). However, many practitioners are more interested in training responses (i.e., causal effects of an intervention) on the individual level (i.e., causal effect of intervention A vs intervention B for individual X). To properly examine individual response variation, multiple confounding sources of variation (e.g., random sampling variability, measurement error, biological variability) must be addressed. Novel study designs where participants complete both interventions and at least one intervention twice can be leveraged to account for these sources of variation (i.e., <i>n</i> of 1 trials). Specifically, the appropriate statistical methods can separate variability into the signal (i.e., participant-by-training interaction) versus the noise (i.e., within-participant variance). This distinction can allow researchers to detect evidence of individual response variation. If evidence of individual response variation exists, researchers can explore predictors of the more favorable intervention, potentially improving exercise prescription. This review outlines the methodology necessary to explore individual response variation to resistance training, predict favorable interventions, and the limitations thereof.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21969,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sports Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sports Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02050-z\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-024-02050-z","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数阻力训练研究侧重于从观察到的群体水平变化得分(即 A 组与 B 组的平均变化)推断平均干预效果。然而,许多实践者更感兴趣的是个体层面的训练反应(即干预的因果效应)(即干预 A 与干预 B 对个体 X 的因果效应)。要正确研究个体反应的变异,就必须解决变异的多种混杂来源(如随机抽样变异、测量误差、生物变异)。在新颖的研究设计中,参与者同时完成两种干预措施,并至少有一种干预措施完成两次,这样的设计可用于考虑这些变异来源(即 n of 1 试验)。具体来说,适当的统计方法可以将变异分为信号(即参与者与训练之间的相互作用)和噪音(即参与者内部变异)。这种区分可以让研究人员发现个体反应变异的证据。如果存在个体反应差异的证据,研究人员就可以探索更有利干预的预测因素,从而改进运动处方。本综述概述了探索阻力训练个体反应差异、预测有利干预措施所需的方法及其局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

N of 1: Optimizing Methodology for the Detection of Individual Response Variation in Resistance Training

N of 1: Optimizing Methodology for the Detection of Individual Response Variation in Resistance Training

Most resistance training research focuses on inference from average intervention effects from observed group-level change scores (i.e., mean change of group A vs group B). However, many practitioners are more interested in training responses (i.e., causal effects of an intervention) on the individual level (i.e., causal effect of intervention A vs intervention B for individual X). To properly examine individual response variation, multiple confounding sources of variation (e.g., random sampling variability, measurement error, biological variability) must be addressed. Novel study designs where participants complete both interventions and at least one intervention twice can be leveraged to account for these sources of variation (i.e., n of 1 trials). Specifically, the appropriate statistical methods can separate variability into the signal (i.e., participant-by-training interaction) versus the noise (i.e., within-participant variance). This distinction can allow researchers to detect evidence of individual response variation. If evidence of individual response variation exists, researchers can explore predictors of the more favorable intervention, potentially improving exercise prescription. This review outlines the methodology necessary to explore individual response variation to resistance training, predict favorable interventions, and the limitations thereof.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sports Medicine
Sports Medicine 医学-运动科学
CiteScore
18.40
自引率
5.10%
发文量
165
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Sports Medicine focuses on providing definitive and comprehensive review articles that interpret and evaluate current literature, aiming to offer insights into research findings in the sports medicine and exercise field. The journal covers major topics such as sports medicine and sports science, medical syndromes associated with sport and exercise, clinical medicine's role in injury prevention and treatment, exercise for rehabilitation and health, and the application of physiological and biomechanical principles to specific sports. Types of Articles: Review Articles: Definitive and comprehensive reviews that interpret and evaluate current literature to provide rationale for and application of research findings. Leading/Current Opinion Articles: Overviews of contentious or emerging issues in the field. Original Research Articles: High-quality research articles. Enhanced Features: Additional features like slide sets, videos, and animations aimed at increasing the visibility, readership, and educational value of the journal's content. Plain Language Summaries: Summaries accompanying articles to assist readers in understanding important medical advances. Peer Review Process: All manuscripts undergo peer review by international experts to ensure quality and rigor. The journal also welcomes Letters to the Editor, which will be considered for publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信