Cited by 122Sports Performance and TrainingMuscle metabolism and nutritionCardiovascular and exercise physiology

Hypertrophic Effects of Concentric vs. Eccentric Muscle Actions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Schoenfeld, Brad J., Ogborn, Dan I., Vigotsky, Andrew D., Franchi, Martino V., Krieger, James W.·2017·Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Abstract

Schoenfeld, BJ, Ogborn, DI, Vigotsky, AD, Franchi, MV, and Krieger, JW. Hypertrophic effects of concentric vs. eccentric muscle actions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 31(9): 2599-2608, 2017-Controversy exists as to whether different dynamic muscle actions produce divergent hypertrophic responses. The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing the hypertrophic effects of concentric vs. eccentric training in healthy adults after regimented resistance training (RT). Studies were deemed eligible for inclusion if they met the following criteria: (a) were an experimental trial published in an English-language refereed journal; (b) directly compared concentric and eccentric actions without the use of external implements (i.e., blood pressure cuffs) and all other RT variables equivalent; (c) measured morphologic changes using biopsy, imaging (magnetic resonance imaging, computerized tomography, or ultrasound), bioelectrical impedance, and/or densitometry; (d) had a minimum duration of 6 weeks; and (e) used human participants without musculoskeletal injury or any health condition that could directly, or through the medications associated with the management of said condition, be expected to impact the hypertrophic response to resistance exercise. A systematic literature search determined that 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Results showed that eccentric muscle actions resulted in…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1519/jsc.0000000000001983

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schoenfeld, B. J., Ogborn, D. I., Vigotsky, A. D., Franchi, M. V., & Krieger, J. W.
Affiliations
  • Lehman College (US)
  • Total Rehabilitation and Sports Injuries Clinic, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada;
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Weightology, LLC, Issaquah, Washington
Corresponding author
Schoenfeld, Brad J.
Venue
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Published
2017-09
Volume
31
Issue
9
Pages
2599-2608
ISSN
1064-8011 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2611116270
Cited by
122
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 3
FWCI
1.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
muscle hypertrophy, eccentric training, concentric training, resistance training, muscle growth, muscle fiber cross-sectional area
MeSH terms
Adult, Biopsy, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Exercise, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Electric Impedance, Muscle, Skeletal, 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