Digestery
Lifestyle practices › Strength Training and Lifespan › Studies

Randomized trial · measured other health measures

3-year trial in 2,157 healthy older adults: strength program showed no clear benefit

Bischoff-Ferrari and colleagues · JAMA · 2020

Original title: Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation, Omega-3 Fatty Acid Supplementation, or a Strength-Training Exercise Program on Clinical Outcomes in Older Adults: The DO-HEALTH Randomized Clinical Trial.

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

No difference

No clear benefit of the strength program on blood pressure, physical performance (SPPB), memory test, bone fractures or infections at 3 years. A total of 25 deaths were reported, with similar numbers in all groups.

The study at a glance

Type of study
Randomized trial
Who or what was studied
2,157 people · healthy adults aged 70 or older (mean age 74.9) who could move well
What was tested
A strength-training exercise program for 3 years, alone or with vitamin D3 (2000 IU/d) and/or omega-3s (1 g/d), vs placebo, in 8 groups.
What it measured
Several kinds of outcomes
How long
156 weeks
Trial registration
NCT01745263
Who has a stake
Company stake
Some authors report fees or grants from Pfizer, Nestle, Roche, Amgen and other firms that sell supplements or drugs; vitamin D and omega-3 were also tested.
Journal
JAMA, 2020
Source
PubMed record 33170239. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • ✓Randomized: people were put into groups by chance, so the groups start out alike.
  • ✓Compared with a placebo, a dummy treatment.
  • ✓Large: 2,157 people.
  • ✓Long: about 3 years.
  • •Measured several kinds of outcomes.
  • –Company stake: Some authors report fees or grants from Pfizer, Nestle, Roche, Amgen and other firms that sell supplements or drugs; vitamin D and omega-3 were also tested.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

Each dot is one on-topic paper on this question. Steps near the top answer the question more directly.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: death and healthy aging

    0

    Not done yet. This is the step that would answer the question.

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    9

    7 benefit, 2 no difference

    ↑ This study is the ringed dot

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  4. Population studies

    9

    8 benefit, 1 mixed

  5. Blood levels and genes

    0

    None among the papers we read.

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Does strength training help you live longer?”

Linked to longer life; not proven.

Confidence: low. Based on 26 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer

Of the other 8 papers on the same step: 7 benefit, 1 no difference. This one found no difference. It differs from most of them.

Other papers on the same step

See all 26 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The reviewer corrected 2 fields after reading the abstract. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.