Skip to main content
. 2009 Jul 8;2009(3):CD002759. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002759.pub2

Ballor 1996.

Methods RCT 
 Method of randomisation: not reported 
 Assessor blinding: no 
 Participant blinding: no 
 Loss to follow‐up: not reported 
 Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no 
 Post‐program follow up: no
Participants Location: USA 
 N = 18 
 Sample: obese, recently completed dietary program 
 Age: mean 61 years (SE 1) 
 Inclusion criteria: aged 55‐70 years, a BMI before weight loss of > 32 kg/m squared, no signs, symptoms or history of heart disease, non‐diabetic, non‐smoker, resting blood pressure <160/90 mm Hg, no symptoms that would preclude safe participation in an exercise program 
 Exclusion criteria: not reported
Interventions PRT versus aerobic 
 1. PRT 
 Type of Ex: 4UL, 3LL 
 Equipment: machines (Universal Gym) 
 Intensity: 50‐80% of 1RM 
 Frequency: Ex3 
 Reps/ sets: 8/3 
 Program duration: 12 weeks 
 Setting: gym 
 Supervision: full 
 Adherence: not reported 
 2. Aerobic Training Group: exercised 3 times per week on a motorised treadmill at approximately 50% of maximum aerobic uptake for 20‐60 minutes per session
Outcomes Strength (1RM) 
 Aerobic capacity 
 Comments on adverse events: no
Notes Data from PRT and aerobic training group were compared
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Allocation concealment? Unclear risk B ‐ Unclear