Influence of Different Intensities of Resistance Training on Selected Strength Parameters among Male Judo Players

Rajapandi P; Anandhan. P.

doi:10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i06.61218

Home SearchPaper Details

Influence of Different Intensities of Resistance Training on Selected Strength Parameters among Male Judo Players

Rajapandi P, Anandhan. P.

Unknown Journal (2025) • Volume 7, Issue 6

Empirical-ClinicalRCTPDF AvailableGrade Eligible⚠️ Moderate Risk Flags

Overall Assessment

Weak Methodological Quality

Assessment created by PaperScores Medical AI v0 on Dec 14, 2025

D-

30/100

Quick Actions

Read Full Paper

Quality Dimensions

Bias & Integrity

COI handling, outcome switching, selective reporting

D-30

Methods Rigour

Protocol clarity, sampling, controls

D-35

External Validity

Generalisability, setting, population

D-30

Transparency & Reproducibility

Data/code/materials availability, preregistration

F5

Significance & Novelty

Contribution vs prior art; context if known

D-35

Statistical Validity

Models, assumptions, multiplicity, CI priority

D40

Integrity & Transparency

Integrity checks

P-hacking risk?

?

Review recommended

Signs of selective hypothesis testing or analysis choices that could inflate false positive rates.

Outcome switching?

?

Review recommended

Evidence that primary outcomes were changed during or after the study, potentially distorting results.

Conflict of interest?

?

Review recommended

Authors have financial or other relationships that could bias research findings.

Data integrity issues?

?

None suspected

Concerns about the accuracy, completeness, or authenticity of the reported data.

Open science signals

Research data

?

Not shared

Raw data used in the analyses is publicly available or accessible upon request.

Analysis code

?

Not shared

Code or scripts used to analyze the data are shared for reproducibility.

Study materials

?

Not shared

Protocols, questionnaires, and other materials are publicly available.

Premise

Primary Research Question

Do medium or high intensity resistance training improve leg, back, and abdominal strength vs control in male judo players?

Hypothesis

Both intensities improve strength; high intensity superior.

Hypothesis is Falsifiable

✓Yes

Between-group post-training differences could refute effect.

PICO Framework

Population✓Yes

45 male judo players, 17–25 y, single site.

Intervention✓Yes

Medium or high intensity resistance training, 3 days/week, 12 weeks.

Comparison✓Yes

Parallel control group with no special training.

Outcome✓Yes

Leg, back, abdominal strength relevant to judo performance.

Literature Positioning

Literature Review Balanced

Well covered

Cites prior judo performance and resistance training literature.

Evidence: pp.1–2, Refs 1–11

Research Gap Clearly Stated

Needs review

Aim stated but explicit gap not articulated.

Evidence: p.1

Stated Contribution Clear

Well covered

Tests effect of medium vs high intensity RT on strength in judokas.

Evidence: Abstract p.1; Methods p.2

Study Provenance

Peer review unclearFunding not reportedCOI not reported4 affiliations listed

Authors & Affiliations

Dept of Physical Education, Annamalai University; Government Arts College, Trichy -22.

Funding Statement

Not reported

Conflicts of Interest

Not reported

Peer Review

?IJFMR venue—peer review not evidenced in paper.

Evidence: p.1

Methodological Assessment

Randomized Controlled TrialCONSORTRCT

14 applicable checklist items.

Yes 1 · No 7 · Unclear 6

Study Design & Protocol

✗

Power Analysis Reported

No power/sample size calculation reported.

Evidence: Methods p.2–3

?

Randomisation Adequate

'Random group design' stated; no method of randomisation.

Evidence: p.2

?

Allocation Concealment

No allocation concealment description.

Evidence: p.2

✗

Blinding

No blinding of participants, trainers, or assessors reported.

Evidence: paper lacks any blinding statement

✗

Blinding Adequate

Given no blinding procedures.

Evidence: paper

?

Intervention Replicable

Training loads/intensity specifics insufficient for replication.

Evidence: Methods p.2

✗

Outcomes Pre-specified

No primary endpoint prespecified; multiple outcomes analysed.

Evidence: Abstract/Methods p.1–2

✗

Pre-registration Evidence

No preregistration or protocol cited.

Evidence: paper

Analysis & Reporting

?

Analysis Set Appropriate (ITT/mITT)

ITT/PP not mentioned; flow not provided.

Evidence: paper

?

Missing Data Handled Appropriately

No handling of missing data described.

Evidence: paper

✓

Baseline Balance Acceptable

Pre-test group differences non-significant (e.g., leg strength F=0.6).

Evidence: Table 1 p.2–3

?

Adherence Adequate

No adherence or attendance reporting.

Evidence: paper

✗

Participant Flow Reported (CONSORT)

No CONSORT-style participant flow.

Evidence: paper

✗

Harms Reported Adequately

No harms/safety reporting.

Evidence: paper

Modules without applicable checklist items (8)

These designs were fully marked as not applicable but remain available for reference.

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to find out the impact of different intensities of resistance training on selected strength among male judo players such as leg strength, back strength and abdominal strength. Since the purpose of the study forty-five male judo players selected from Christian Educational Society, Ottanchathiram, Tamil Nadu, India and their age ranged between 17-25 years was selected as subjects. The selected subjects were divided into three equal groups, in which, group – I (n = 15) underwent medium intensity resistance training, group – II (n = 15) underwent high intensity resistance training, group – III (n = 15) acted as control which do not participate in any special training. The training programme was carried out for this study is three days per week for twelve weeks. The data collected from the three groups before and after the experimental training period were statistically examined to find out the significant improvement if any using the analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The level of significance confidence was fixed at 0.05. Whenever, the obtained ‘F’ ratio value for adjusted post-test means was found to be significant, the Scheffe’s post hoc test was applied to determine the paired mean differences. The results of the study showed that effects of the medium and high intensity resistance training on strength such as leg strength, back strength and abdominal strength has shown improvement for the medium and high intensity resistance training groups when compared with the control groups.

Quick Actions

Read Full Paper

Study Overview

Study Design

RCT

Primary classification used to evaluate this research.

Population

Male judo players (17–25 y) from Christian Educational Society, Ottanchathiram, India.

Brief summary of who or what was studied.

Sample Size

45

Number of participants included in the study analyses.

Study Arms

3 arms

Total number of intervention or comparison groups.

Pre-registration

Not registered

Indicates whether the protocol or trial was registered before data collection.

Randomisation

Unclear

How participants were allocated to groups: None (no randomisation), Simple (random order), Blocked (groups balanced in blocks), Stratified (balanced within subgroups), Adaptive (allocation adjusted based on previous enrollments).

Blinding

None

Who was unaware of group assignments: None (everyone knew), Single blind (participants didn't know their group), Double blind (participants and researchers didn't know), Triple blind (also outcome assessors didn't know).

Analysis Set

Unclear

Which participants were included in analysis: ITT (all randomized, regardless of adherence), mITT (modified ITT, excluding some for valid reasons), Per protocol (only those who completed as planned), As treated (grouped by actual treatment received), Other (alternative approach).

Follow-up

12 weeks

Duration of observation or follow-up for outcomes.

Primary Outcome

Primary outcome was not pre-specified.

Effect Size

ANCOVA F: Leg F(2,41)=6.14; Back F(2,41)=11.68; Abdominal F(2,41)=35.98; p<0.05

Reviewer Notes

Interventional 3-arm exercise study; described as random group design; no details on allocation or blinding.

Publication Details

DOI

10.36948/ijfmr.2025.v07i06.61218

Published

November 20, 2025

Citations

0 citations

External Resources

DOI Link OpenAlex

Disclaimer: This assessment is generated by AI and should not be the sole basis for clinical or research decisions. Always review the original paper and consult with domain experts.

Suggested Papers

D

Attention‑Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder in Children: Overcoming Diagnostic Challenges and Exploring Modern Treatment Approaches

Michalina Raczkowska et al.•2025

F

An assessment of the impact of thimerosal on childhood neurodevelopmental disorders

David A. Geier et al.•2003

No Report

Histamine H<sub>3</sub>‐receptors inhibit cholinergic neurotransmission in guinea‐pig airways

M. Ichinose et al.•1989

Suggested Papers

From Our Blog

Preregistration: The Time Machine for Science

How do we stop scientists from changing their predictions after seeing the data? We make them register their plans in advance.

Data Dredging: Torturing the Data Until It Confesses

When you look for patterns without a hypothesis, you will find them. But they will be lies.

Sensitivity vs. Specificity: Why a Positive Test Might Be Wrong

A positive result doesn't always mean you're sick. Understanding the trade-off between catching every case and avoiding false alarms.