Cargando…
Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability
There is evidence from human twin and family studies as well as mouse and rat selection experiments that there are considerable interindividual differences in the response of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and other cardiometabolic traits to a given exercise programme dose. We developed this consen...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6818669/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30862704 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-100328 |
_version_ | 1783463634640306176 |
---|---|
author | Ross, Robert Goodpaster, Bret H Koch, Lauren G Sarzynski, Mark A Kohrt, Wendy M Johannsen, Neil M Skinner, James S Castro, Alex Irving, Brian A Noland, Robert C Sparks, Lauren M Spielmann, Guillaume Day, Andrew G Pitsch, Werner Hopkins, William G Bouchard, Claude |
author_facet | Ross, Robert Goodpaster, Bret H Koch, Lauren G Sarzynski, Mark A Kohrt, Wendy M Johannsen, Neil M Skinner, James S Castro, Alex Irving, Brian A Noland, Robert C Sparks, Lauren M Spielmann, Guillaume Day, Andrew G Pitsch, Werner Hopkins, William G Bouchard, Claude |
author_sort | Ross, Robert |
collection | PubMed |
description | There is evidence from human twin and family studies as well as mouse and rat selection experiments that there are considerable interindividual differences in the response of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and other cardiometabolic traits to a given exercise programme dose. We developed this consensus statement on exercise response variability following a symposium dedicated to this topic. There is strong evidence from both animal and human studies that exercise training doses lead to variable responses. A genetic component contributes to exercise training response variability. In this consensus statement, we (1) briefly review the literature on exercise response variability and the various sources of variations in CRF response to an exercise programme, (2) introduce the key research designs and corresponding statistical models with an emphasis on randomised controlled designs with or without multiple pretests and post-tests, crossover designs and repeated measures designs, (3) discuss advantages and disadvantages of multiple methods of categorising exercise response levels—a topic that is of particular interest for personalised exercise medicine and (4) outline approaches that may identify determinants and modifiers of CRF exercise response. We also summarise gaps in knowledge and recommend future research to better understand exercise response variability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6818669 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68186692019-11-12 Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability Ross, Robert Goodpaster, Bret H Koch, Lauren G Sarzynski, Mark A Kohrt, Wendy M Johannsen, Neil M Skinner, James S Castro, Alex Irving, Brian A Noland, Robert C Sparks, Lauren M Spielmann, Guillaume Day, Andrew G Pitsch, Werner Hopkins, William G Bouchard, Claude Br J Sports Med Consensus Statement There is evidence from human twin and family studies as well as mouse and rat selection experiments that there are considerable interindividual differences in the response of cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and other cardiometabolic traits to a given exercise programme dose. We developed this consensus statement on exercise response variability following a symposium dedicated to this topic. There is strong evidence from both animal and human studies that exercise training doses lead to variable responses. A genetic component contributes to exercise training response variability. In this consensus statement, we (1) briefly review the literature on exercise response variability and the various sources of variations in CRF response to an exercise programme, (2) introduce the key research designs and corresponding statistical models with an emphasis on randomised controlled designs with or without multiple pretests and post-tests, crossover designs and repeated measures designs, (3) discuss advantages and disadvantages of multiple methods of categorising exercise response levels—a topic that is of particular interest for personalised exercise medicine and (4) outline approaches that may identify determinants and modifiers of CRF exercise response. We also summarise gaps in knowledge and recommend future research to better understand exercise response variability. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-09 2019-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6818669/ /pubmed/30862704 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-100328 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Consensus Statement Ross, Robert Goodpaster, Bret H Koch, Lauren G Sarzynski, Mark A Kohrt, Wendy M Johannsen, Neil M Skinner, James S Castro, Alex Irving, Brian A Noland, Robert C Sparks, Lauren M Spielmann, Guillaume Day, Andrew G Pitsch, Werner Hopkins, William G Bouchard, Claude Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability |
title | Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability |
title_full | Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability |
title_fullStr | Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability |
title_full_unstemmed | Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability |
title_short | Precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability |
title_sort | precision exercise medicine: understanding exercise response variability |
topic | Consensus Statement |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6818669/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30862704 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-100328 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rossrobert precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT goodpasterbreth precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT kochlaureng precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT sarzynskimarka precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT kohrtwendym precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT johannsenneilm precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT skinnerjamess precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT castroalex precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT irvingbriana precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT nolandrobertc precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT sparkslaurenm precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT spielmannguillaume precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT dayandrewg precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT pitschwerner precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT hopkinswilliamg precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability AT bouchardclaude precisionexercisemedicineunderstandingexerciseresponsevariability |