| Methods |
RCT
Method of randomisation: not reported
Assessor blinding: no
Participant blinding: no
Loss to Follow‐up: 1
Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no
Post‐program follow up: no |
| Participants |
Location: Canada
N = 20
Sample: healthy older men, recruited through newspaper advertisement
Age: mean 68.3 years (se 1.1)
Inclusion criteria: male, aged 65‐74
Exclusion criteria: positive Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire, abnormal ECG or blood pressure response, musculoskeletal impairment |
| Interventions |
PRT versus control and versus aerobic
1. PRT
Type of Ex: 5LL
Equipment: cuff weights
Intensity: high (6RM)
Frequency: Ex3
Reps/Sets: 6/3
Duration: 12 weeks
Setting: gym
Supervision: full
Adherence: not reported
2. Control Group: usual level of activity
3. Aerobic Training Group: intermittent walking on treadmill until pain subsided, 3 times per week |
| Outcomes |
Peak VO2
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 |
