Research in the Fitness Industry

This is for trainers who want to give their clients the best advice. I hope it spurs you to read more, own your opinions, and look for specific answers to specific problems for specific clients.

The group that should stop reading now

Research in the fitness industry seems split between those who use science and those who are "ahead of it". Let's clear one group out first. Stop reading if you believe any of the following:

• You're ahead of science
• You felt it work
• Your clients say it works
• Your clients tried everything else and only your system worked
• Your guru said that waiting for science means years of not helping clients
• The placebo effect works, so what's the problem?

If that's you, you couldn't be more misinformed about science, research, ethics and how to observe, measure and interpret data. Make peace with your inner genius and move on.

The next split

Among science-based trainers there are two kinds. First, the "evidence-based" trainer who doesn't care much about the source, quantity or even the outcome of the research and will happily make a claim off a single paper. You know them by lines like:

• "You can prove anything with statistics."
• "These are the papers, but using my clinical experience I'd also suggest…"
• "The doctor who taught me quotes papers, so I'm being evidence-based."
• "Well, according to this book…"
• "Here's my opinion article, propped up with a few qualified friends and some cherry-picked studies."
• "Here's a funny, sciency-sounding Instagram post that's really just passive-aggressive."

If that's you, either move on or read on to change. This is where I lose a lot of the fascia guns, rollers and magic-wand lovers.

Then there's the level I sit at, which in doctoral-level academia is laughably poor but lovingly trying. It's enough to make sure my students and clients get to the right information and don't waste money on fascial release, postural alignment, learning by drawing on people, or the latest "better biomechanics or pain science" pitch.

So let me share some lessons from someone who doesn't believe his own results, but instead follows a system.

The guidelines

1. Attack research in levels. Start with opinion, industry sayings or client questions to help you define the question you want answered. Defining the question — and accepting it will keep changing — is the hard part of the process.

2. Move towards scientific evidence. At this stage I'll still use science blogs, podcasts and videos, but I look for professors still working at universities in that field. I use their references to check I'm on the right track and to get used to the terminology I'm about to meet.

Watch out for people claiming expertise through unearned titles. I once saw a talk marketed by an "expert" billed as a Doctor of Physiotherapy who didn't hold a degree. You don't need a degree to have read a lot of research, but claiming a qualification you don't have is alarm bells. Alarm bells equal fraud.

3. Get to the papers. Use PubMed. Look for good authors, research on decent-sized human groups, and studies that seem ethical, using a control group and free of sponsorship.

4. Filter the papers. Use your own system. Mine is:

• Age — under 10 years, unless it's classical knowledge
• Journal — above-average impact factor for its field, so I can lean on their expert panel
• Author — are they genuinely an expert in what they studied?
• Statistical significance — I want a result better than chance
• Functional significance — I want the approach to make a worthwhile difference, not just a measurable one

You'll build your own filters. Once you have them, you'll know when a technique is poor because it breaks your own rules, and you'll know to flag your opinions clearly as opinions — which is the first phase of researching any topic.

To go further, look at our MSAS and Injury to Performance courses, where you learn to research in a fitness context alongside a group of non-judgemental learners.