12 sources: 1 cohort study, 5 meta-analyses, 5 randomised controlled trials, 1 systematic review
Physical · Practice
Strength Training for Bone Health
Progressive, moderate-to-heavy weight-bearing lifts for the hips and spine, two or three sessions a week: one way to carry out what the review summary this entry was written from reports on resistance training's wider benefits, whose bone result is improved femur and hip bone mineral density in older adults.
45 min · 2-3x per week
IntermediateGym, home
Before you start
Those with diagnosed osteoporosis or prior fragility fractures should train under professional guidance to choose their loading and avoid high-risk spinal flexion.
When to seek a professional
- Diagnosed osteoporosis or prior fragility fracture
- Acute back pain or suspected fracture
How to do it
2-3 sessions per week · progressive moderate-to-high loads targeting hips and spine · 1-3 sets of major weight-bearing compound lifts · 30-50 min per session
The research behind this entry establishes something about dose, but not these exact parameters; treat them as a practical way to apply the finding rather than as the finding itself.
barbell, machines, dumbbells, weighted vestOlder adultsWomenFor most adults
What the evidence says
What the sources say
This practice is one way to carry out what the sources on the concept entry (phys.strength.broad-health-benefits) studied: resistance training and outcomes beyond strength and size, bone among them. Pimenta 2019 (systematic review) reports that 72% of studies showed changes in bone mineral content or density with resistance training, and that resistance training improved bone mineral content or density, muscle strength and lean mass across ages and sexes. Radaelli 2024 (meta-analysis) reports that a low volume of resistance training improved physical function and lean body mass in healthy older adults, and Straight 2016 (meta-analysis) that resistance training improved lower-extremity muscle power in adults aged 50 and over. The full account, source by source, is on the concept entry this practice links to (phys.strength.broad-health-benefits).
Common misconceptions
- (myth: Only weight-bearing cardio like walking builds bone.) CORRECTION: Progressive resistance training improves femur and hip bone mineral density in older adults.
What we won't claim
- Does not diagnose, treat or cure osteoporosis or any disease
- Not a substitute for medical management of bone disease
- BMD outcomes are population-level; individual results vary
12 sources: 1 cohort study, 5 meta-analyses, 5 randomised controlled trials, 1 systematic review
- Agreement
- sources not comparable. Direction recorded for 9 of 12 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
- The claim's outcome
- Outcome not yet recorded
- Certainty
- No source states a certainty rating.
What each source measured and concluded (12)
randomised controlled trial · 2023
Sheoran et al. (2023) — Strength gains after 12 weeks of resistance training correlate with neurochemical markers of brain health in older adults: a randomized control 1H-MRS study
- What it measured
- Peak torque (PT) of knee extension and flexion; neurometabolite ratios (tNAA/tCr, tCho/tCr, Glx/tCr, mIns/tCr) in hippocampus, sensorimotor, and prefrontal cortices.
- How it measured it
- Isokinetic dynamometer for PT; proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) for neurometabolites.
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- How it was read
- read in full text
randomised controlled trial · 2019
Marston et al. (2019) — Resistance training enhances delayed memory in healthy middle-aged and older adults: A randomised controlled trial.
- What it measured
- 1. Cognitive function (delayed verbal memory) via CogState computerised battery (validated tool). 2. Secondary outcomes: Maximal muscle strength via 1RM test; Body composition. 3. Compared to non-exercising control group and baseline.
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- Its conclusion, in its own words
- “12 weeks of intense resistance training improves delayed verbal memory irrespective of training design (i.e., high-load vs. moderate-load).”
- How it was read
- read in full text
randomised controlled trial · 2024
Baxter et al. (2024) — Effects of once- versus twice-weekly eccentric resistance training on muscular function and structure in older adults: a randomised controlled trial
- What it measured
- Lower-limb muscle power, strength, and size.
- How it measured it
- Muscle power: 10-repetition sit-to-stand (STS) test; Strength: dynamometry for RTD, contractile impulse, and knee extensor torque during MVIC, and eccentric lower-limb force on a recumbent isokinetic stepper ergometer; Muscle size: real-time two-dimensional B-mode ultrasonography.
- How it was read
- read in full text
randomised controlled trial · 2019
Ihalainen et al. (2019) — Strength Training Improves Metabolic Health Markers in Older Individual Regardless of Training Frequency
- What it measured
- Body composition (fat mass, lean mass), inflammation markers (IL-6, hs-CRP), lipid profile (HDL, LDL, triglycerides), glycemic profile (glucose, insulin, HbA1c), and blood pressure.
- How it measured it
- Dual X-ray absorptiometry for body composition; commercial immunoassay techniques for blood markers; automated device for blood pressure.
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- How it was read
- read in full text
meta-analysis · 2021
Schumann et al. (2021) — Compatibility of Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Training for Skeletal Muscle Size and Function: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- What it measured
- Maximal strength, explosive strength, and muscle hypertrophy.
- How it measured it
- Specific tests: isometric and isoinertial measurements for maximal strength, jump tests or isometric rate of force development for explosive strength, and objective measurements like ultrasound or MRI for muscle hypertrophy.
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis, systematic review
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 1090 participants across 43 studies
cohort study · 2025
Pamart et al. (2025) — Association between muscle strength gains and biventricular cardiac remodeling in response to high-intensity resistance training in healthy untrained males: a longitudinal study
- What it measured
- Association between muscle strength gains and biventricular cardiac remodeling.
- How it measured it
- Muscle strength: Con-Trex isokinetic dynamometer and field-based 1-RM tests; Cardiac remodeling: three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (3DTTE).
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- How it was read
- read in full text
systematic review · 2019
Pimenta et al. (2019) — BONE HEALTH, MUSCLE STRENGTH AND LEAN MASS: RELATIONSHIPS AND EXERCISE RECOMMENDATIONS
- What it measured
- Bone mineral content/density (BMC/BMD), muscle strength, body composition.
- How it measured it
- Laboratory tests (e.g., DXA for BMC/BMD), validated strength tests (e.g., 1RM), body composition analysis.
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- How it was read
- read in full text
meta-analysis · 2022
Lundberg et al. (2022) — The Effects of Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Training on Muscle Fiber Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- What it measured
- Hypertrophy of type I and type II muscle fibers.
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Worsened
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 300 participants across 15 studies
meta-analysis · 2023
Wang et al. (2023) — Effect of resistance training on local muscle endurance in middle-aged and older adults: A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.
- What it measured
- Local muscle endurance (LME)
- How it measured it
- Via maximal repetitions during an isotonic test
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- systematic review with meta-analysis
- Heterogeneity, as stated
- LIMITATIONS: Moderate heterogeneity and publication bias;
meta-analysis · 2016
Straight et al. (2016) — Effects of Resistance Training on Lower-Extremity Muscle Power in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- What it measured
- Lower-extremity muscle power via leg press (LP) and knee extension (KE).
- How it measured it
- Quantified in watts, likely using a laboratory test or objective measurement tool.
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- How it was read
- read in full text
meta-analysis · 2024
Radaelli et al. (2024) — Effects of Resistance Training Volume on Physical Function, Lean Body Mass and Lower-Body Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of 151 Randomised Trials
- What it measured
- Physical function (fast walking speed, timed up and go, 6-min walking tests), lean body mass, lower-body muscle hypertrophy, lower-body muscle strength (knee extension and leg press 1-RM, isometric muscle strength, isokinetic torque).
- How it measured it
- Standardized tests (validated).
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- Improved
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- systematic review and meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 6306 participants across 151 studies
randomised controlled trial · 2019
Werner et al. (2019) — Effects of a 12-Week Resistance Training Program on Arterial Stiffness: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- What it measured
- Arterial stiffness indices
- How it measured it
- Validated measurements
- Direction it states for the claim's outcome
- No effect
- Its conclusion, in its own words
- “chronic resistance training does not appear to influence central arterial stiffness, regardless of training volume and load.”
- How it was read
- read in full text
Key sources (13) · 1 not counted
Each source below is shown with its study design and a link to the original study, or, where it is not a completed research paper, with what kind of record it is; those are not counted. This is the audit trail.
randomised controlled trialStrength gains after 12 weeks of resistance training correlate with neurochemical markers of brain health in older adults: a randomized control 1H-MRS study
randomised controlled trialResistance training enhances delayed memory in healthy middle-aged and older adults: A randomised controlled trial.
randomised controlled trialEffects of once- versus twice-weekly eccentric resistance training on muscular function and structure in older adults: a randomised controlled trial
randomised controlled trialStrength Training Improves Metabolic Health Markers in Older Individual Regardless of Training Frequency
meta-analysisCompatibility of Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Training for Skeletal Muscle Size and Function: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
cohort studyAssociation between muscle strength gains and biventricular cardiac remodeling in response to high-intensity resistance training in healthy untrained males: a longitudinal study
systematic reviewBONE HEALTH, MUSCLE STRENGTH AND LEAN MASS: RELATIONSHIPS AND EXERCISE RECOMMENDATIONS
meta-analysisThe Effects of Concurrent Aerobic and Strength Training on Muscle Fiber Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
meta-analysisEffect of resistance training on local muscle endurance in middle-aged and older adults: A systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.
meta-analysisEffects of Resistance Training on Lower-Extremity Muscle Power in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
meta-analysisEffects of Resistance Training Volume on Physical Function, Lean Body Mass and Lower-Body Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of 151 Randomised Trials
randomised controlled trialEffects of a 12-Week Resistance Training Program on Arterial Stiffness: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Type not recordedNetwork Analysis Identifies Circulating MicroRNA Associated With Muscle Mass Gains In Resistance Trained Older Adults
Why do some records show a record type instead of a study design?
A study design is shown for a completed, peer-reviewed paper. A registered protocol, a preprint, a conference abstract, a referee report or a book chapter has not been through peer review as a finished paper, so it is labelled for what it is, and it is counted in no source count. Where a record could not be confirmed as a completed paper at all, it says so rather than guessing. They all stay in the list, and their DOI still resolves, because the count of what was screened is part of the audit trail.
- Protocol / registration A registered plan for a review or trial, not its results.
- Preprint Posted by its authors before peer review.
- Conference abstract A conference summary rather than a peer-reviewed paper.
- Peer-review report A referee's report on a paper, not the paper itself.
- Guideline / position stand A recommendation derived from evidence, which is a step further from the data than the evidence itself.
- Book chapter A chapter in a scholarly book rather than a journal paper.
- Type not recorded Our record does not say what kind of publication this is, so it is counted in no source count. That is a gap in our data, not a judgement about the research.
Explore all 778 studies in Strength Training →
The full evidence base this focus area draws on, every study with its design and DOI.What it is for
Build muscleGet strongerProtect my bone densityReduce my risk of fallingStay capable as I get older