Effects of warming-up on physical performance: a systematic review with meta-analysis
Participants
32 included studies (human subjects; warm-up had to include activities other than stretching), all rated high quality on the PEDro scale (6.5-9 of 10, mean 7.6); various physical activities and populations.
Protocol
Systematic search of Medline, SPORTDiscus and PubMed (1966-April 2008) for studies of warm-up effects on performance improvement in physical activities
Quality assessed independently by two assessors (Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale); only studies scoring >6 with sufficient data were analysed
Key Results
Warm-up improved performance in 79% of the performance criteria examined
Little evidence that warming up is detrimental to sports participants
Few well-conducted randomised controlled trials existed — the authors call for more to settle the role of warm-up
Mechanism
Not addressed in the abstract. Mechanisms (muscle temperature, nerve conduction, metabolic rate, compliance) are covered in REF-264.
Practical Application
Systematic review and meta-analysis of 32 high-quality studies (PEDro 6.5-9, mean 7.6): an adequate warm-up improved performance in 79% of the criteria examined, with little evidence of harm — the base's default that a warm-up precedes any hard session or race rests on this.
Inference, not tested: 79% of criteria improved means roughly one in five did not — for a given athlete and task, the response should be checked in training rather than assumed.
Limitations
High heterogeneity across included studies (different protocols, populations, outcome measures)
Few randomised controlled trials in the evidence base at the time (search ends April 2008)
Warm-up protocols varied widely — no single optimal protocol identified
How this entry was checked and changed
Content correction 2026-09-27
"79 studies reviewed" -> 32 studies were included; 79% is the share of performance criteria that improved, not a study count.
Removed claims not in the abstract: "improved across strength, power, speed and endurance tasks", the mechanism list, "effect sizes generally small-to-moderate", "even brief warm-up is superior".
Added the abstract's search window, quality scoring (PEDro 6.5-9, mean 7.6) and the authors' call for RCTs; lead now the review's finding.