| Methods |
RCT with 3 groups: PRT, control, and aerobic group
Method of randomisation: not reported
Assessor blinding: not reported
Participant blinding: yes for echocadiograms
Loss to follow‐up: no
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no
Post‐program follow up: no |
| Participants |
Location: Canada
N = ? (did not report sample size for each group)
Sample: women
Age: mean = 70 years (SD = 4)
Inclusion criteria: a) no clinical evidence of cardiovascular disease; b) normal resting electrocardiogram (ECG); c) normal ECG response to graded exercise; d) no requirement or use of cardiovascular medications; e) no regular participation in AT and/or ST; and f) absence of any cerebrovascular or orthopedic disability that would limit exercise training.
Exclusion criteria: not reported |
| Interventions |
PRT versus control and versus aerobic
1. PRT
Type of Ex: 3LL/5UL
Equipment: not reported
Intensity: 50% of 1RM and increased 2.5% per week until 75% of 1 RM
Frequency: Ex3
Reps/Sets: 10/2
Duration: 12 weeks
Setting: not reported (Gym?)
Supervision: full
Adherence: not reported
2. Control group: continue normal daily activities
3. Aerobic training: cycle exercise at 60‐80% of heart rate reserve |
| Outcomes |
Muscle strength
Absolute VO2peak
Comments on adverse events: yes |
| Notes |
sample size for each group was not reported.
12 weeks of strength training is as effective as 12 weeks of aerobic training for increasing relative VO2peak, however, strength training is more effective than aerobic training for improving overall muscle strength. |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment? |
Unclear risk |
B ‐ Unclear |
