Frequency: The overlooked resistance training variable for inducing muscle hypertrophy?
Abstract
The principle of progressive overload must be adhered to for individuals to continually increase muscle size with resistance training. While the majority of trained individuals adhere to this principle by increasing the number of sets performed per exercise session, this does not appear to be an effective method for increasing muscle size once a given threshold is surpassed. Opposite the numerous studies examining differences in training loads and sets of exercise performed, a few studies have assessed the importance of training frequency with respect to muscle growth, none of which have tested very high frequencies of training (e.g., 7 days a week). The lack of studies examining such frequencies may be related to the American College of Sports Medicine recommendation that trained individuals use split routines allowing at least 48 h of rest between exercises that stress the same muscle groups. Given the attenuated muscle protein synthetic response to resistance exercise present in trained individuals, it can be hypothesized that increasing the training frequency would allow for more frequent elevations in muscle protein synthesis and more time spent in a positive net protein balance. We hypothesize that increasing the training frequency, as opposed to the training load or sets performed, may be a more appropriate strategy for trained individuals to progress a resistance exercise program aimed at increasing muscle size.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A given weekly volume distributed across more sessions may create more frequent, discrete transcriptional "pulses" of Pol I activation, potentially reducing the need for very high within-session fatigue.
“A given weekly volume distributed across more sessions may create more frequent, discrete transcriptional “pulses” of Pol I activation, potentially reducing the need for very high within-session fatigue [152].”
From Ribosome Biogenesis as a Putative Bottleneck to Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy: Mechanisms, Human Evidence, and Practical Modulators (2026) · cites this paper as [152]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 114
- Authors
- Dankel, S. J., Mattocks, K. T., Jessee, M. B., Buckner, S. L., Mouser, J. G., Counts, B. R., Laurentino, G. C., & Loenneke, J. P.
- Affiliations
- University of Mississippi (US)
- Corresponding author
- Loenneke, Jeremy P.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Sports Medicine
- Published
- 2016-10-17
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 799-805
- ISSN
- 0112-1642 (ISSN-L)
- 1179-2035
- OpenAlex
- W2534786478
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 7
- FWCI
- 8.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Sports Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Keywords
- exercise frequency, resistance training, muscle hypertrophy, progressive overload, muscle protein synthesis, trained individuals, net protein balance, training load
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Hypertrophy, Exercise, Muscle, Skeletal, Muscle Strength, Resistance Training
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review