Última actualización 12 de septiembre de 2026
Key finding
VAT decreased significantly in AT and RT compared with CG (P = 0.001 and P = 0.014, respectively).
This study investigated the effects of aerobic and resistance training on abdominal fat and fasting glucose levels in adults with prediabetes, finding significant reductions in both interventions compared to a control group.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Long-Term (1–5 y)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Guarda investigacion, organiza estudios y vuelve a encontrar evidencia importante rapidamente.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study investigated the effects of aerobic and resistance training on abdominal fat and fasting glucose levels in adults with prediabetes, finding significant reductions in both interventions compared to a control group.
This study highlights the importance of physical activity in managing prediabetes, a condition that can lead to type 2 diabetes. By demonstrating that both aerobic and resistance training can effectively reduce abdominal fat and improve fasting glucose levels, the findings support the integration of these exercises into lifestyle interventions for at-risk populations.
No significant differences in subcutaneous adipose tissue or lipid profiles were found. The study did not assess long-term effects beyond the intervention period. Generalizability may be limited to specific populations with prediabetes.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Juan Y, Xia D, Jitao F, et al. Both Aerobic and Resistance Training Reduce Abdominal Adipose Tissue and Fasting Plasma Glucose in Adults with Prediabetes. Journal of Diabetes Research. 2019;2019:8469739. doi:10.1155/2019/8469739
Visceral adipose tissue decreased by 19.87 cm² in both AT and RT compared to CG (P = 0.001 and P = 0.014).
Fasting plasma glucose decreased by 0.19 mmol/L in RT and 0.17 mmol/L in AT compared to CG (P = 0.003 and P = 0.014).
Lean body mass increased by 0.17 kg in RT compared to AT and CG (P = 0.031 and P = 0.045).
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Aerobic exercise, Control Group Usual Activity, Resistance training and Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG), lipid profiles, Conversion to diabetes, and 3 more.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Aerobic exercise
Primary outcomes
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
6
Related topics
9
Evidence pairs
1825
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Guarda estudios y paginas de evidencia, organiza tu Evidence Tracker y manten en un solo lugar la investigacion que te importa.
Evidencia principal
Relación de evidencia
Evidencia relacionada
Tema de evidencia
Guardar evidencia
Tema de evidencia
Guardar evidencia
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Aerobic exercise → Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
Aerobic exercise → Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
Control Group Usual Activity → Conversion to diabetes
Control Group Usual Activity → Conversion to diabetes
Control Group Usual Activity → lipid profiles
Control Group Usual Activity → lipid profiles
Resistance training → Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
Resistance training → Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
Resistance training → Subcutaneous adipose tissue area
Resistance training → Subcutaneous adipose tissue area
Resistance training → Visceral adipose tissue area
Resistance training → Visceral adipose tissue area
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on Aerobic Exercise and Fasting Glucose, Resistance training and Fasting Glucose.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Physical Activity
Physical Activity
Physical Activity
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies on Aerobic Exercise
Contributes to Aerobic Exercise evidence base.
All studies measuring Fasting Glucose
Measures Fasting Glucose as a key outcome.
All studies on Resistance training
Contributes to Resistance training evidence base.
All studies measuring lipid profiles
Measures lipid profiles as a key outcome.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
7 results
5 results
7 results
5 results
7 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
Aerobic Exercise appears to improve fasting glucose.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 83.2 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on 14 supporting studies with consistent results and a positive effect signal.
Resistance training appears to improve fasting plasma glucose (FPG).
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG)
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 82.3 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Resistance training appears to affect lean body mass.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
Lean body mass
EvidenceScore™ Strong | EvidenceScore™ 79.4 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Resistance training for lipid profiles.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are consistent across studies.
Ranked evidence signals
lipid profiles
EvidenceScore™ Moderate | EvidenceScore™ 69.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Consistent | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Centrada en la evidencia, no en la publicidad.
Tus datos siempre están protegidos.
Se agregan nuevos estudios todos los días.
