Fitness, body composition and blood lipids following 3 concurrent strength and endurance training modes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated changes in physical fitness, body composition, and blood lipid profile following 24 weeks of 3 volume-equated concurrent strength and endurance training protocols. Physically active, healthy male and female participants (aged 18-40 years) performed strength and endurance sessions on different days (DD; men, n = 21; women, n = 18) or in the same session with endurance preceding strength (ES; men, n = 16; women, n = 15) or vice versa (SE; men, n = 18; women, n = 14). The training volume was matched in all groups. Maximal leg press strength (1-repetition maximum (1RM)) and endurance performance (maximal oxygen consumption during cycling), body composition (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), and blood lipids were measured. 1RM and maximal oxygen consumption increased in all groups in men (12%-17%, p < 0.001; and 7%-18%, p < 0.05-0.001, respectively) and women (13%-21%, p < 0.01-0.001; and 10%-25%, p < 0.01-0.001, respectively). Maximal oxygen consumption increased more in DD vs. ES and SE both in men (p = 0.003-0.008) and women (p = 0.008-0.009). Total body lean mass increased in all groups (3%-5%, p < 0.01-0.001). Only DD led to decreased total body fat (men, -14% ± 15%, p < 0.001; women, -13% ± 14%, p = 0.009) and abdominal-region fat (men, -18% ± 14%, p = 0.003; women, -17% ± 15%, p = 0.003). Changes in blood lipids were correlated with changes in abdominal-region fat in the entire group (r = 0.283, p = 0.005) and in DD (r = 0.550, p = 0.001). In conclusion, all modes resulted in increased physical fitness and lean mass, while only DD led to decreases in fat mass. Same-session SE and ES combined training is effective in improving physical fitness while volume-equated, but more frequent DD training may be more suitable for optimizing body composition and may be possibly useful in early prevention of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".