Nieto-Acevedo Raúl, Romero-Moraleda Blanca, Díaz-Lara Francisco Javier, Rubia Alfonso de la, González-García Jaime, Mon-López Daniel
Departamento de Deportes, Facultad de Ciencias de la Actividad Física y del Deporte, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Calle Martín Fierro, 7, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
Department of Physical Education, Sport and Human Movement, Autonomous University of Madrid, 28049 Madrid, Spain.
Sports (Basel). 2023 Jun 13;11(6):118. doi: 10.3390/sports11060118.
The purpose of this paper was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the differences in the mean propulsive velocities between men and women in the different exercises studied (squat, bench press, inclined bench press and military press). Quality Assessment and Validity Tool for Correlational Studies was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. Six studies of good and excellent methodological quality were included. Our meta-analysis compared men and women at the three most significant loads of the force-velocity profile (30, 70 and 90% of 1RM). A total of six studies were included in the systematic review, with a total sample of 249 participants (136 men and 113 women). The results of the main meta-analysis indicated that the mean propulsive velocity is lower in women than men in 30% of 1RM (ES = 1.30 ± 0.30; CI: 0.99-1.60; < 0.001) and 70% of 1RM (ES = 0.92 ± 0.29; CI: 0.63, 1.21; < 0.001). In contrast, for the 90% of the 1RM (ES = 0.27 ± 0.27; CI: 0.00, 0.55), we did not find significant differences ( = 0.05). Our results support the notion that prescription of the training load through the same velocity could cause women to receive different stimuli than men.
本文的目的是对研究不同运动（深蹲、卧推、斜卧推和军事推举）中男性和女性平均推进速度差异的研究进行系统综述和荟萃分析。使用相关性研究的质量评估和有效性工具来评估纳入研究的方法学质量。纳入了六项方法学质量良好和优秀的研究。我们的荟萃分析在力量 - 速度曲线的三个最显著负荷（1RM的30%、70%和90%）下比较了男性和女性。系统综述共纳入六项研究，总样本量为249名参与者（136名男性和113名女性）。主要荟萃分析结果表明，在1RM的30%（效应量 = 1.30 ± 0.30；置信区间：0.99 - 1.60；P < 0.001）和1RM的70%（效应量 = 0.92 ± 0.29；置信区间：0.63, 1.21；P < 0.001）时，女性的平均推进速度低于男性。相比之下，在1RM的90%时（效应量 = 0.27 ± 0.27；置信区间：0.00, 0.55），我们未发现显著差异（P = 0.05）。我们的结果支持这样一种观点，即通过相同速度规定训练负荷可能会使女性比男性受到不同的刺激。
