Table 7.
Study 2 interview themes and subthemes.
| Theme | Sample representativeness* (% of sample and number of participants) | |
|---|---|---|
| Athletes (n = 10) | Coaches (n = 18) | |
| Meaningfulness of strength changes in 6 weeks | ||
| Any measurable change in 6 weeks may be meaningful | 50 (n = 5) | 50 (n = 9) |
| A 5–10 kg increase on the SQ may be meaningful | 30 (n = 3) | 33 (n = 6) |
| A 2.5–5 kg increase on the BP may be meaningful | 20 (n = 2) | 33 (n = 6) |
| A 5–10 kg increase on the DL may be meaningful | 30 (n = 3) | 16 (n = 3) |
| A 2.5–5 kg increase per powerlift may be meaningful | 10 (n = 1) | 16 (n = 3) |
| A 2+% increase per powerlift may be meaningful | N/A | 33% (n = 6) |
| Factors affecting the magnitude of meaningfulness of strength changes in 6 weeks | ||
| Strength level and experience of the athlete | 20 (n = 2) | 72 (n = 13) |
| Time of the training season (competition preparation vs. off-season) | 50 (n = 5) | N/A |
| Bodyweight of the athlete | N/A | 33 (n = 6) |
The participants of the interviews are the PL athletes and coaches from study 1.