Author
Abstract
Background: The optimization of athletic training in university-level sport science programmes (ages 18-25) requires evidence-based synthesis. Despite a growing body of individual intervention studies on periodization, recovery modalities, and multi-component training, no meta-analysis has systematically quantified the pooled effect sizes across these domains for collegiate athletes. Objectives: To synthesize and meta-analyze the effects of (1) periodization strategies, (2) sleep and nutrition-based recovery protocols, and (3) combined strength-endurance training on physical performance outcomes - including VO₂max, maximal strength (1RM), power output (Wmax), and sport-specific performance indices - in university-level athletes. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science (January 2010 - March 2025). Studies were eligible if they: (a) employed randomized or quasi-experimental designs, (b) enrolled healthy university athletes aged 18-25, and (c) reported at least one quantifiable performance outcome. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed using Hedges' g with 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was quantified via I² statistics. GRADE certainty of evidence was applied to all outcomes. Results: Forty-seven studies (n = 2,314 participants) met inclusion criteria. Periodized training produced large pooled effects on VO₂max (g = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.71-1.05; I² = 42%) and maximal strength (g = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.78-1.08; I² = 38%). Recovery optimization (sleep extension + targeted nutrition) yielded moderate effects on power output (g = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.48-0.74). Combined training programmes demonstrated large effects on sport-specific performance (g = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.70-1.02; I² = 47%). Conclusions: Evidence supports the adoption of block periodization and recovery-integrated programming as the most effective approaches for optimizing multi-dimensional athletic performance in university-level athletes. These findings provide a robust evidence base for national physical education curricula reform in higher-education sport science programmes.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:snp:journl:art-1777548290167. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://synoptic-journal.vercel.app/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.