PeerJ Reviewer Match - SIT improves adolescent physical fitness

Javascript is disabled in your browser. Please enable Javascript to view PeerJ.

Effectiveness of sprint interval training in enhancing adolescent physical fitness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to quantify the impact of sprint interval training (SIT) on adolescents’ physical fitness and to provide an evidence-based foundation for promoting adolescent health.

Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched systematically for eligible studies up to 2 June 2025. After screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment, meta-analyses were performed in Stata 18.0.

Results: Meta-analysis results revealed that SIT significantly improves adolescents' aerobic capacity (VO₂max, MD=3.66, 95%CI[2.67, 4.65], p=0.000, I² =82.4%), anaerobic capacity (peak power, MD=48.39, 95%CI[19.26, 77.52], p=0.001, I² =0.0%; average power, MD=36.64, 95%CI[14.62, 58.66], p=0.001, I² =26.7%), Jumping ability (squat jump, MD=1.23, 95%CI[0.62, 1.84], p=0.000, I² =0.0%; countermovement jump, MD=1.74, 95%CI[1.22 ， 2.26]，p=0.000, I² =0.0%; standing long jump, MD=6.81, 95%CI[0.86, 12.75], p=0.025, I² =0.0%), physical composition (body mass index, SMD=－0.63, 95%CI[－1.04, －0.23], p=0.002, I² =60.5%; body fat percentage, SMD=－0.68, 95%CI[－1.05, －0.30], p=0.000, I² =61.8%), Sprint ability (10m, MD=－0.16, 95%CI[－0.28, －0.04], p=0.007, I² =47.2%; 20m, MD=－0.15, 95%CI[－0.24, －0.07], p=0.001, I² =47.2%; 30m, MD=－0.22, 95%CI[－0.40, －0.03], p=0.022, I² =75.4%) and change-of-direction ability (T test, MD=－0.27, 95%CI[－0.41, －0.13], p=0.000, I² =11.7%).

Conclusion: SIT exerts significant positive effects on adolescents' aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity, jumping ability, body composition, sprint ability, and change-of-direction ability. Therefore, it is an effective method for improving youth Physical Fitness.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].