Candela Diaz-Canestro1, David Montero2,3. 1. Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, Canada. 2. Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, Canada. david.monterobarril@ucalgary.ca. 3. Cumming School of Medicine, Department of Cardiac Sciences, Libin Cardiovascular Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada. david.monterobarril@ucalgary.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increases in maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) are strongly associated with improved cardiovascular health. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether VO2max responses to endurance training (ET), the most effective intervention to improve VO2max, are influenced by sex. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE and Web of Science since their inceptions until February 2019 for articles assessing the VO2max response to a given sex-matched dose of ET in healthy age-matched men and women. Meta-analyses were performed to determine the mean difference between VO2max responses in men versus women. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were used to assess potential moderating factors. RESULTS: After systematic review, eight studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies implemented common modalities of ET in healthy untrained individuals, comprising a total of 175 men and women (90 ♂, 85 ♀). ET duration and intensity were sex-matched in all studies. After data pooling, ET induced substantially larger increases in absolute VO2max in men compared with women (mean difference = + 191 ml·min-1, 95% CI 99, 283; P < 0.001). A greater effect of ET on relative VO2max was also observed in men versus women (mean difference = + 1.95 ml·min-1·kg-1, 95% CI 0.76, 3.15; P = 0.001). No heterogeneity was detected among studies (I2 = 0%, P ≥ 0.59); the meta-analytical results were robust to potential moderating factors. CONCLUSION: Pooled evidence demonstrates greater improvements in VO2max in healthy men compared with women in response to a given dose of ET, suggesting the presence of sexual dimorphism in the trainability of aerobic capacity.
BACKGROUND: Increases in maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max) are strongly associated with improved cardiovascular health. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether VO2max responses to endurance training (ET), the most effective intervention to improve VO2max, are influenced by sex. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of MEDLINE and Web of Science since their inceptions until February 2019 for articles assessing the VO2max response to a given sex-matched dose of ET in healthy age-matched men and women. Meta-analyses were performed to determine the mean difference between VO2max responses in men versus women. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were used to assess potential moderating factors. RESULTS: After systematic review, eight studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies implemented common modalities of ET in healthy untrained individuals, comprising a total of 175 men and women (90 ♂, 85 ♀). ET duration and intensity were sex-matched in all studies. After data pooling, ET induced substantially larger increases in absolute VO2max in men compared with women (mean difference = + 191 ml·min-1, 95% CI 99, 283; P < 0.001). A greater effect of ET on relative VO2max was also observed in men versus women (mean difference = + 1.95 ml·min-1·kg-1, 95% CI 0.76, 3.15; P = 0.001). No heterogeneity was detected among studies (I2 = 0%, P ≥ 0.59); the meta-analytical results were robust to potential moderating factors. CONCLUSION: Pooled evidence demonstrates greater improvements in VO2max in healthy men compared with women in response to a given dose of ET, suggesting the presence of sexual dimorphism in the trainability of aerobic capacity.
Authors: Ulrik Wisløff; Asbjørn Støylen; Jan P Loennechen; Morten Bruvold; Øivind Rognmo; Per Magnus Haram; Arnt Erik Tjønna; Jan Helgerud; Stig A Slørdahl; Sang Jun Lee; Vibeke Videm; Anja Bye; Godfrey L Smith; Sonia M Najjar; Øyvind Ellingsen; Terje Skjaerpe Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-06-04 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Kelsey J Santisteban; Andrew T Lovering; John R Halliwill; Christopher T Minson Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-19 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Jingyi Qian; Michael P Walkup; Shyh-Huei Chen; Peter H Brubaker; Dale S Bond; Phyllis A Richey; John M Jakicic; Kun Hu; Frank A J L Scheer; Roeland J W Middelbeek Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 19.112