Physiological and Functional Responses to Low-Moderate Versus High-Intensity Progressive Resistance Training in Frail Elders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this efficacy study was to measure the dose-response effect of a free weight-based resistance training program by comparing the effects of two training intensities (low-moderate and high) of the knee extensor (KE) muscles on muscle function, functional limitations, and self-reported disability. METHODS: The authors conducted a single-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Twenty-two institutionalized elders (mean age, 81.5 years) were assigned to either high-intensity strength training (HI; n = 8), low-moderate intensity strength training (LI; n = 6), or weight-free placebo-control training (PC; n = 8). The HI group trained at 80% of their 1-repetition maximum and the LI group trained at 40%. All groups performed 3 sets of 8 repetitions, 3 times per week for 10 weeks. Outcome measures included KE maximal strength, KE endurance, and functional performance as assessed by 6-minute walking, chair-rising, and stair-climbing tests, and by self-reported disability. RESULTS: KE strength and endurance, stair-climbing power, and chair-rising time improved significantly in the HI and LI groups compared with the PC group. Six-minute walking distance improved significantly in the HI group but not in the LI group compared with the PC group. Changes observed in HI were significantly different from those observed in the LI group for KE strength and endurance and the 6-minute walking test, with a trend in the same direction for chair-rising and stair-climbing. Changes in strength were significantly related to changes in functional outcomes, explaining 37% to 61% of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: These results show strong dose-response relationships between resistance training intensity and strength gains, and between strength gains and functional improvements after resistance training. Low-moderate intensity resistance training of the KE muscles may not be sufficiently robust from a physiologic perspective to achieve optimal improvement of functional performance. Supervised HI, free weight-based training for frail elders appears to be as safe as lower intensity training but is more effective physiologically and functionally.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".