2024/04/28 by Martin C. Refalo, Greg Nuckols, Andrew J. Galpin +3 · 1 voice · 1 citation
Medicine · #Sports Performance and Training #Cardiovascular and exercise physiology #Body Composition Measurement Techniques
paper · pdf · doi:10.51224/srxiv.400
Purpose: Muscle hypertrophy may be influenced by biological differences between males and females.This meta-analysis investigated absolute and relative changes in muscle size following resistance training (RT) between males and females and whether measures of muscle size, body region assessed, muscle fibre type, and RT experience moderate the results.Methods: Studies were included if male and female participants were healthy ( 18-50 years old) adults that completed the same RT intervention, and a measure of pre-to postintervention changes in muscle size was included.Out of 2720 screened studies, 29 studies were included in the statistical analysis.Bayesian methods were used to estimate a standardised mean difference (SMD) and log response ratio (lnRR) with exponentiated percentage change (Exp.% Change of lnRR) for each outcome.Results: Absolute increases in muscle size slightly favoured males versus females [SMD = 0.19 (95% HDI: 0.11 to 0.28)], however, relative increases in muscle size were similar between sexes [Exp.% Change of lnRR = 0.69% (95% HDI: -1.50% to 2.88%)].Outcomes were minimally influenced by the measure of muscle size and not influenced by RT experience of participants.Absolute hypertrophy of upper-body but not lower-body regions was favoured in males.Type I muscle fibre hypertrophy slightly favoured males, but Type II muscle fibre hypertrophy was similar between sexes.Conclusion: Our findings indicate that females have a similar potential to induce muscle hypertrophy as males (particularly when considering relative increases in muscle size from baseline) and findings of our secondary analyses should inform future research investigations.