@misc{GaeblerPrieskeHortobagyietal.2018,
  author    = {Gaebler, Martijn and Prieske, Olaf and Hortobagyi, Tibor and Granacher, Urs},
  title     = {The effects of concurrent strength and endurance training on physical fitness and athletic performance in Youth},
  series = {Frontiers in physiology},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {Frontiers in physiology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-042X},
  doi       = {10.3389/fphys.2018.01057},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Combining training of muscle strength and cardiorespiratory fitness within a training cycle could increase athletic performance more than single-mode training. However, the physiological effects produced by each training modality could also interfere with each other, improving athletic performance less than single-mode training. Because anthropometric, physiological, and biomechanical differences between young and adult athletes can affect the responses to exercise training, young athletes might respond differently to concurrent training (CT) compared with adults. Thus, the aim of the present systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effects of concurrent strength and endurance training on selected physical fitness components and athletic performance in youth. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science identified 886 records. The studies included in the analyses examined children (girls age 6-11 years, boys age 6-13 years) or adolescents (girls age 12-18 years, boys age 14-18 years), compared CT with single-mode endurance (ET) or strength training (ST), and reported at least one strength/power-(e.g., jump height), endurance-(e.g., peak. VO2, exercise economy), or performance-related (e.g., time trial) outcome. We calculated weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs). CT compared to ET produced small effects in favor of CT on athletic performance (n = 11 studies, SMD = 0.41, p = 0.04) and trivial effects on cardiorespiratory endurance (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.04, p = 0.86) and exercise economy (n = 5 studies, SMD = 0.16, p = 0.49) in young athletes. A sub-analysis of chronological age revealed a trend toward larger effects of CT vs. ET on athletic performance in adolescents (SMD = 0.52) compared with children (SMD = 0.17). CT compared with ST had small effects in favor of CT on muscle power (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.23, p = 0.04). In conclusion, CT is more effective than single-mode ET or ST in improving selected measures of physical fitness and athletic performance in youth. Specifically, CT compared with ET improved athletic performance in children and particularly adolescents. Finally, CT was more effective than ST in improving muscle power in youth.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{GaeblerPrieskeHortobagyietal.2018,
  author    = {G{\"a}bler, Martijn and Prieske, Olaf and Hortobagyi, Tibor and Granacher, Urs},
  title     = {The Effects of Concurrent Strength and Endurance Training on Physical Fitness and Athletic Performance in Youth},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {471},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-417683},
  pages     = {13},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Combining training of muscle strength and cardiorespiratory fitness within a training cycle could increase athletic performance more than single-mode training. However, the physiological effects produced by each training modality could also interfere with each other, improving athletic performance less than single-mode training. Because anthropometric, physiological, and biomechanical differences between young and adult athletes can affect the responses to exercise training, young athletes might respond differently to concurrent training (CT) compared with adults. Thus, the aim of the present systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effects of concurrent strength and endurance training on selected physical fitness components and athletic performance in youth. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science identified 886 records. The studies included in the analyses examined children (girls age 6-11 years, boys age 6-13 years) or adolescents (girls age 12-18 years, boys age 14-18 years), compared CT with single-mode endurance (ET) or strength training (ST), and reported at least one strength/power—(e.g., jump height), endurance—(e.g., peak V°O2, exercise economy), or performance-related (e.g., time trial) outcome. We calculated weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs). CT compared to ET produced small effects in favor of CT on athletic performance (n = 11 studies, SMD = 0.41, p = 0.04) and trivial effects on cardiorespiratory endurance (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.04, p = 0.86) and exercise economy (n = 5 studies, SMD = 0.16, p = 0.49) in young athletes. A sub-analysis of chronological age revealed a trend toward larger effects of CT vs. ET on athletic performance in adolescents (SMD = 0.52) compared with children (SMD = 0.17). CT compared with ST had small effects in favor of CT on muscle power (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.23, p = 0.04). In conclusion, CT is more effective than single-mode ET or ST in improving selected measures of physical fitness and athletic performance in youth. Specifically, CT compared with ET improved athletic performance in children and particularly adolescents. Finally, CT was more effective than ST in improving muscle power in youth.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GaeblerPrieskeHortobagyietal.2018,
  author    = {G{\"a}bler, Martijn and Prieske, Olaf and Hortobagyi, Tibor and Granacher, Urs},
  title     = {The Effects of Concurrent Strength and Endurance Training on Physical Fitness and Athletic Performance in Youth},
  series = {Frontiers in Physiology},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Physiology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne},
  issn      = {1664-042X},
  doi       = {10.3389/fphys.2018.01057},
  pages     = {1 -- 13},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {Combining training of muscle strength and cardiorespiratory fitness within a training cycle could increase athletic performance more than single-mode training. However, the physiological effects produced by each training modality could also interfere with each other, improving athletic performance less than single-mode training. Because anthropometric, physiological, and biomechanical differences between young and adult athletes can affect the responses to exercise training, young athletes might respond differently to concurrent training (CT) compared with adults. Thus, the aim of the present systematic review with meta-analysis was to determine the effects of concurrent strength and endurance training on selected physical fitness components and athletic performance in youth. A systematic literature search of PubMed and Web of Science identified 886 records. The studies included in the analyses examined children (girls age 6-11 years, boys age 6-13 years) or adolescents (girls age 12-18 years, boys age 14-18 years), compared CT with single-mode endurance (ET) or strength training (ST), and reported at least one strength/power—(e.g., jump height), endurance—(e.g., peak V°O2, exercise economy), or performance-related (e.g., time trial) outcome. We calculated weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs). CT compared to ET produced small effects in favor of CT on athletic performance (n = 11 studies, SMD = 0.41, p = 0.04) and trivial effects on cardiorespiratory endurance (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.04, p = 0.86) and exercise economy (n = 5 studies, SMD = 0.16, p = 0.49) in young athletes. A sub-analysis of chronological age revealed a trend toward larger effects of CT vs. ET on athletic performance in adolescents (SMD = 0.52) compared with children (SMD = 0.17). CT compared with ST had small effects in favor of CT on muscle power (n = 4 studies, SMD = 0.23, p = 0.04). In conclusion, CT is more effective than single-mode ET or ST in improving selected measures of physical fitness and athletic performance in youth. Specifically, CT compared with ET improved athletic performance in children and particularly adolescents. Finally, CT was more effective than ST in improving muscle power in youth.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{GaeblerBerberyanPrieskeetal.2022,
  author    = {G{\"a}bler, Martijn and Berberyan, Hermine S. and Prieske, Olaf and Elferink-Gemser, Marije Titia and Hortobagyi, Tibor and Warnke, Torsten and Granacher, Urs},
  title     = {Strength Training Intensity and Volume Affect Performance of Young Kayakers/Canoeists},
  series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-54228},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-542283},
  pages     = {1 -- 10},
  year      = {2022},
  abstract  = {Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of moderate intensity, low volume (MILV) vs. low intensity, high volume (LIHV) strength training on sport-specific performance, measures of muscular fitness, and skeletal muscle mass in young kayakers and canoeists. Methods: Semi-elite young kayakers and canoeists (N = 40, 13 ± 0.8 years, 11 girls) performed either MILV (70-80\% 1-RM, 6-12 repetitions per set) or LIHV (30-40\% 1-RM, 60-120 repetitions per set) strength training for one season. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare effects of training condition on changes over time in 250 and 2,000 m time trials, handgrip strength, underhand shot throw, average bench pull power over 2 min, and skeletal muscle mass. Both between- and within-subject designs were used for analysis. An alpha of 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Between- and within-subject analyses showed that monthly changes were greater in LIHV vs. MILV for the 2,000 m time trial (between: 9.16 s, SE = 2.70, p < 0.01; within: 2,000 m: 13.90 s, SE = 5.02, p = 0.01) and bench pull average power (between: 0.021 W⋅kg-1, SE = 0.008, p = 0.02; within: 0.010 W⋅kg-1, SE = 0.009, p > 0.05). Training conditions did not affect other outcomes. Conclusion: Young sprint kayakers and canoeists benefit from LIHV more than MILV strength training in terms of 2,000 m performance and muscular endurance (i.e., 2 min bench pull power).},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{GaeblerBerberyanPrieskeetal.2021,
  author    = {G{\"a}bler, Martijn and Berberyan, Hermine S. and Prieske, Olaf and Elferink-Gemser, Marije Titia and Hortob{\´a}gyi, Tibor and Warnke, Torsten and Granacher, Urs},
  title     = {Strength Training Intensity and Volume Affect Performance of Young Kayakers/Canoeists},
  series = {Frontiers in physiology},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {Frontiers in physiology},
  publisher = {Frontiers Research Foundation},
  address   = {Lausanne, Schweiz},
  issn      = {1664-042X},
  doi       = {10.3389/fphys.2021.686744},
  pages     = {1 -- 10},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of moderate intensity, low volume (MILV) vs. low intensity, high volume (LIHV) strength training on sport-specific performance, measures of muscular fitness, and skeletal muscle mass in young kayakers and canoeists. Methods: Semi-elite young kayakers and canoeists (N = 40, 13 ± 0.8 years, 11 girls) performed either MILV (70-80\% 1-RM, 6-12 repetitions per set) or LIHV (30-40\% 1-RM, 60-120 repetitions per set) strength training for one season. Linear mixed-effects models were used to compare effects of training condition on changes over time in 250 and 2,000 m time trials, handgrip strength, underhand shot throw, average bench pull power over 2 min, and skeletal muscle mass. Both between- and within-subject designs were used for analysis. An alpha of 0.05 was used to determine statistical significance. Results: Between- and within-subject analyses showed that monthly changes were greater in LIHV vs. MILV for the 2,000 m time trial (between: 9.16 s, SE = 2.70, p < 0.01; within: 2,000 m: 13.90 s, SE = 5.02, p = 0.01) and bench pull average power (between: 0.021 W⋅kg-1, SE = 0.008, p = 0.02; within: 0.010 W⋅kg-1, SE = 0.009, p > 0.05). Training conditions did not affect other outcomes. Conclusion: Young sprint kayakers and canoeists benefit from LIHV more than MILV strength training in terms of 2,000 m performance and muscular endurance (i.e., 2 min bench pull power).},
  language  = {en}
}