Athletic Performance after Complex Training Compared to Traditional Strength Training.

Authors

Yiqing Xie, Yemin Han, Qing Du, Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo, Kai Xu

Published in

International journal of sports medicine. Sep 13, 2026. Epub Sep 13, 2026.

Abstract

Effects of ≥4‑week Complex Training (CT) in trained/developmental athletes (≥3×/week, local competition) are unclear. This review addressed this gap. Five databases were searched for RCTs (updated June 2025) comparing CT vs. traditional strength training on jump, agility, and sprint. Three‑level meta‑analyses with moderation and GRADE certainty assessment were used. Seventy‑five studies were included. CT produced moderate‑to‑large improvements in CMJ (62 studies; ES = 0.58, p < .01, I² = 33.99%), SJ (23; ES = 0.77, p < .01, I² = 68.59%), agility (29; ES = -1.05, p < .01, I² = 63.97%; negative = faster), and sprint (50; ES = -0.65, p < .05, I² = 56.04%). Larger effects for technical/composite and younger athletes. Dose-response meta‑regression revealed non‑linear associations. Peak CMJ at 1 rep minimum (SMD = 1.69, 95%CI [0.56, 2.81]) and 14 reps maximum (SMD = 1.36, [0.34, 2.38]). Largest agility and sprint improvements at 6 sets (agility: SMD = -1.60, [-2.37, -0.83]; sprint: SMD = -1.28, [-2.01, -0.57]) and 12 reps (sprint min.rep: SMD = -1.33, [-2.26, -0.40]), indicating attenuation at insufficient/excessive loads. Certainty moderate. CT effectively improves athletic performance, moderated by athlete characteristics and optimized by outcome‑specific dosing.

PMID:
42732766
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 14 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.