Internal Training Load Perceived by Athletes and Planned by Coaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Inoue, Allan; dos Santos Bunn, Priscila; do Carmo, Everton Crivoi; Lattari, Eduardo; da Silva, Elirez Bezerra

doi:10.1186/s40798-022-00420-3

Sports Medicine - Open

Table 3 Approach grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation on the certainty of evidence

From: Internal Training Load Perceived by Athletes and Planned by Coaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Certainty assessment							№ of participants		Effect		Certainty	Importance
No of studies	Study design	Risk of bias	Inconsistency	Indirectness	Imprecision	Other considerations	Coaches	Athletes	Relative (95% CI)	Absolute (95% CI)	Certainty	Importance
Overall RPE
34	Observational studies	Serious^a	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	109	602	–	SMD 0.19 SD lower (0.04 lower to 0.41 higher)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT
Overall sRPE
21	Observational studies	Serious^a	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	61	368	–	SMD 0.05 SD higher (0.24 lower to 0.33 higher)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT
Easy RPE
20	Observational studies	Serious^a	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	None	63	518	–	SMD 0.44 SD lower (0.87 lower to 0.01 lower)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT
Moderate RPE
21	Observational studies	Serious^a	Not serious	Not serious	Not serious	Publication bias strongly suspected^b	64	536	–	SMD 0.05 SD higher (0.22 lower to 0.31 higher)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT
Hard RPE
21	Observational studies	Serious^a	Serious^c	Not serious	Not serious	None	64	536	–	SMD 0.41 SD higher (0.19 lower to 1 higher)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT
Easy sRPE
8	Observational studies	Serious^a	Not serious	Not serious	Serious^d	None	18	114	–	SMD 0.54 SD lower (1.05 lower to 0.02 lower)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT
Moderate sRPE
8	Observational studies	Serious^a	Not serious	Not serious	Serious^d	None	18	114	–	SMD 0.15 SD lower (0.66 lower to 0.36 higher)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT
Hard sRPE
8	Observational studies	Serious^a	Not serious	Not serious	Serious^d	None	18	114	–	SMD 0.2 SD higher (0.3 lower to 0.71 higher)	⊕ ◯◯◯ Very low	IMPORTANT

CI confidence interval, SMD standardized mean difference
Explanations
a. More than 25% of participants were from studies with a moderate or high risk of bias
b. Egger's linear regression indicated potential publication bias for RPE in the moderate category
c. Heterogeneity I² > 50%
d. The total number of participants in this comparison is less than 140

Back to article page