Inter-individual differences in body mass index were not observed as a result of aerobic exercise in children and adolescents with overweight and obesity

Resistance training and inter-interindividual response differences on cardiorespiratory fitness in older adults: An ancillary meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Examine true inter-individual response differences (IIRD) as a result of resistance training on cardiorespiratory fitness in older adults. Data from a recent meta-analysis of 22 randomized controlled trials representing 552 men and women (292 resistance training, 260 control) ≥ 60 years of age were included. The primary outcome was cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max) in ml.kg-1.min-1. Using the inverse variance heterogeneity (IVhet) model, statistically significant treatment effect (resistance training minus control) increases in VO2max in ml.kg-1.min-1 were found (mean, 1.8, 95% CI, 0.4 to 3.3 ml.kg-1.min-1, p = 0.01; Q = 82.8, p < 0.001; I2 = 74.6%, 95% CI, 61.6 to 83.3%; τ 2 =1.1). The 95% prediction interval (PI) was -0.8 to 4.5 ml.kg-1.min-1. However, no statistically significant IIRD was observed (mean, 0.6, 95% CI, -1.1 to 1.4 ml.kg-1.min-1; τ 2 =1.5). The 95% PI was -1.8 to 2.0 ml.kg-1.min-1. In conclusion, while progressive resistance training may increase VO2max in ml.kg-1.min-1, a lack of true resistance-training-associated IIRD exist.

Exploring interindividual differences in fasting and postprandial insulin sensitivity adaptations in response to sprint interval exercise training

Previous studies have concluded that wide variance in changes in insulin sensitivity markers following exercise training demonstrates heterogeneity in individual trainability. However, these studies frequently don't account for technical, biological, and random within-subject measurement error. We used the standard deviation of individual responses (SDIR) to determine whether interindividual variability in trainability exists for fasting and postprandial insulin sensitivity outcomes following low-volume sprint interval training (SIT). We pooled data from 63 untrained participants who completed 6 weeks of SIT (n = 49; VO2max: 35 (7) mL⋅kg-1⋅min-1) or acted as no-intervention controls (n = 14; VO2max: 34 (6) mL⋅kg-1⋅min-1). Fasting and oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT)-derived measures of insulin sensitivity were measured pre- and post-intervention. SDIR values were positive and exceeded a small effect size threshold for changes in fasting glucose (SDIR = 0.27 [95%CI 0.07,0.38] mmol⋅L-1), 2-h OGTT glucose (SDIR = 0.89 [0.22,1.23] mmol⋅L-1), glucose area-under-the-curve (SDIR = 66.4 [-81.5,124.3] mmol⋅L-1⋅120min-1) and The Cederholm Index (SDIR = 7.2 [-16.0,19.0] mg⋅l2⋅mmol-1⋅mU-1⋅min-1), suggesting meaningful individual responses to SIT, whilst SDIR values were negative for fasting insulin, fasting insulin resistance and insulin AUC. For all variables, the 95% CIs were wide and/or crossed zero, highlighting uncertainty about the existence of true interindividual differences in exercise trainability. Only 2-22% of participants could be classified as responders or non-responders with more than 95% certainty. Our findings demonstrate it cannot be assumed that variation in changes in insulin sensitivity following SIT is attributable to inherent differences in trainability, and reiterate the importance of accounting for technical, biological, and random error when examining heterogeneity in health-related training adaptations.Highlights This study tested whether true interindividual variability exists for changes in insulin sensitivity and glyceamic control following 6-weeks of low volume sprint interval training (SIT).The high level of technical, biological, and random error associated with repeated measurements of insulin sensitivity and glycaemic control, means we can neither confidently conclude that there is evidence of true interindividual differences in the trainability of these outcomes following SIT, nor confidently identify responders or non-responders for such parameters.Researchers contrasting responders vs. non-responders for a given parameter, either to understand mechanisms of adaptation and/or develop physiological/genetic/epigenetic predictors of response, need to be aware that identification of responders and non-responders with sufficient certainty may not be achievable for parameters with a high level of technical, biological, and random error.

Effects of resistance training on body weight and body composition in older adults: An inter-individual response difference meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Whether true inter-individual response differences (IIRD) occur as a result of resistance training on body weight and body composition in older adults with overweight and obesity is not known. To address this gap, data from a previous meta-analysis representing 587 men and women (333 resistance training, 254 control) ≥ 60 years of age nested in 15 randomized controlled trials of resistance training ≥ 8 weeks were included. Resistance training and control group change outcome standard deviations treated as point estimates for body weight and body composition (percent body fat, fat mass, body mass index in kg.m2, and lean body mass) were used to calculate true IIRD from each study. True IIRD as well as traditional pairwise comparisons were pooled using the inverse-variance (IVhet) model. Both 95% confidence intervals (CI) and prediction intervals (PI) were calculated. While statistically significant improvements were found for body weight and all body composition outcomes (p < 0.05 for all), no statistically significant IIRD was observed for any of the outcomes (p > 0.05 for all) and all 95% PIs overlapped. Conclusions: While resistance training is associated with improvements in body weight and body composition in older adults, the lack of true IIRD suggests that factors other than training response variation (random variation, physiological responses associated with behavioral changes that are not the result of resistance training) are responsible for the observed variation in body weight and body composition.

Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Moderators of Cardiorespiratory Fitness, Waist Circumference, and Body Mass Responses: A Large-Scale Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis

Although many studies have assumed variability reflects variance caused by exercise training, few studies have examined whether interindividual differences in trainability are present following exercise training. The present individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis sought to: (1) investigate the presence of interindividual differences in trainability for cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), waist circumference, and body mass; and (2) examine the influence of exercise training and potential moderators on the probability that an individual will experience clinically important differences. The IPD meta-analysis combined data from 1879 participants from eight previously published randomized controlled trials. We implemented a Bayesian framework to: (1) test the hypothesis of interindividual differences in trainability by comparing variability in change scores between exercise and control using Bayes factors; and (2) compare posterior predictions of control and exercise across a range of moderators (baseline body mass index (BMI) and exercise duration, intensity, amount, mode, and adherence) to estimate the proportions of participants expected to exceed minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) for all three outcomes. Bayes factors demonstrated a lack of evidence supporting a high degree of variance attributable to interindividual differences in trainability across all three outcomes. These findings indicate that interindividual variability in observed changes are likely due to measurement error and external behavioural factors, not interindividual differences in trainability. Additionally, we found that a larger proportion of exercise participants were expected to exceed MCIDs compared with controls for all three outcomes. Moderator analyses identified that larger proportions were associated with a range of factors consistent with standard exercise theory and were driven by mean changes. Practitioners should prescribe exercise interventions known to elicit large mean changes to increase the probability that individuals will experience beneficial changes in CRF, waist circumference and body mass.

Exercise and Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Children and Adolescents With Obesity: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of exercise on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in children and adolescents with obesity. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of exercise ≥4 weeks in children and adolescents with obesity were included if one or more CVD risk factors were included as an outcome. Studies were retrieved by searching 7 electronic databases, cross-referencing, and expert review. Data were pooled using the inverse-variance heterogeneity (IVhet) model and strength of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) instrument. Thirty-nine studies representing 1548 participants (847 exercise, 701 control) met the inclusion criteria. Aerobic exercise improved 10 of 12 (83.3%) outcomes (P < .05 for all) while combined aerobic and strength training improved 5 of 8 (62.5%) outcomes (P < .05 for all). The strength of evidence ranged from "very low" to "moderate." It was concluded that aerobic exercise, as well as combined aerobic and strength training, is associated with improvements in multiple CVD risk factors among children and adolescents with obesity. However, the generally low strength of evidence suggests a need for future well-designed and conducted RCTs on the effects of exercise, especially strength training, in children and adolescents with obesity.

A Systematic Review Examining the Approaches Used to Estimate Interindividual Differences in Trainability and Classify Individual Responses to Exercise Training

Background: Many reports describe statistical approaches for estimating interindividual differences in trainability and classifying individuals as "responders" or "non-responders." The extent to which studies in the exercise training literature have adopted these statistical approaches remains unclear. Objectives: This systematic review primarily sought to determine the extent to which studies in the exercise training literature have adopted sound statistical approaches for examining individual responses to exercise training. We also (1) investigated the existence of interindividual differences in trainability, and (2) tested the hypothesis that less conservative thresholds inflate response rates compared with thresholds that consider error and a smallest worthwhile change (SWC)/minimum clinically important difference (MCID). Methods: We searched six databases: AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, and SportDiscus. Our search spanned the aerobic, resistance, and clinical or rehabilitation training literature. Studies were included if they used human participants, employed standardized and supervised exercise training, and either: (1) stated that their exercise training intervention resulted in heterogenous responses, (2) statistically estimated interindividual differences in trainability, and/or (3) classified individual responses. We calculated effect sizes (ES_IR) to examine the presence of interindividual differences in trainability. We also compared response rates (n = 614) across classification approaches that considered neither, one of, or both errors and an SWC or MCID. We then sorted response rates from studies that also reported mean changes and response thresholds (n = 435 response rates) into four quartiles to confirm our ancillary hypothesis that larger mean changes produce larger response rates. Results: Our search revealed 3,404 studies, and 149 were included in our systematic review. Few studies (n = 9) statistically estimated interindividual differences in trainability. The results from these few studies present a mixture of evidence for the presence of interindividual differences in trainability because several ES_IR values lay above, below, or crossed zero. Zero-based thresholds and larger mean changes significantly (both p < 0.01) inflated response rates. Conclusion: Our findings provide evidence demonstrating why future studies should statistically estimate interindividual differences in trainability and consider error and an SWC or MCID when classifying individual responses to exercise training. Systematic Review Registration: [website], identifier [registration number].