quantitative
Analysis v1
Strong Support
In nearly half of the most popular science reviews on strength and fitness, researchers made a math mistake—they used the wrong number to calculate how strong an exercise or supplement’s effect was. This made the effects look way bigger than they really were, and most of the super huge effects (over 3.0) were just due to this error.
40
0
Evidence from Studies
Supporting (1)
40
Community contributions welcome
40
With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility: Common Errors in Meta-Analyses and Meta-Regressions in Strength & Conditioning Research
Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis
2023 FebThis study found that almost half of the top strength and conditioning research reviews made a math mistake—using the wrong number to calculate how strong an exercise effect was—making the results look way bigger than they really are. This matches what the claim says.
Contradicting (0)
0
Community contributions welcome
No contradicting evidence found
Gold Standard Evidence Needed
According to GRADE and EBM methodology, here is what ideal scientific evidence would look like to definitively prove or disprove this specific claim, ordered from strongest to weakest evidence.