Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance-training volume and muscle hypertrophy
Meta-analysis: each extra weekly set ≈ +0.37% muscle gain; higher vs lower volume +3.9%
Key Findings
Meta-regression of 34 treatment groups from 15 studies on weekly resistance-training volume and measures of muscle mass
Weekly sets as a continuous variable: significant effect on muscle size (P = 0.002); each additional weekly set = +0.023 effect size, ≈ +0.37% muscle gain
Higher vs lower volume within each study: significant (P = 0.03); ES difference 0.241 ≈ 3.9% greater gain with the higher volume
Three-level categories (<5, 5-9, 10+ sets per muscle per week): only a trend (P = 0.074) — the categorical comparison did not reach significance
Authors' conclusion: a graded dose-response relationship — more weekly volume, more hypertrophy, across the range studied; the upper limit of the range is not defined
Practical Application
Meta-analysis of 15 studies (34 groups): muscle growth rises with weekly set volume in a graded way — each additional weekly set per muscle adds about 0.37% (ES +0.023), and higher-volume conditions gained ~3.9% more than lower-volume ones, while the split into <5 / 5-9 / 10+ sets per week was only a trend (P = 0.074) — so for an athlete protecting or building muscle, more weekly sets per muscle group help across the studied range, and 10+ sets per week is a reasonable working target rather than a proven threshold.
For a hybrid/endurance athlete this volume competes with endurance load (interference + recovery, REF-512) — prioritise compound movements (squat, deadlift, press) so that each set counts for several muscle groups (house advice, not from this review).
Not from this paper: recovery is slower in masters (REF-349) → the same volume may need to be spread over more days; how to distribute volume across the week is REF-514.
Limitations
The meta-sample is mostly young/trained — the volume ceiling in masters may be lower (recovery limit)
Hypertrophy ≠ necessarily strength/power (distinct adaptations)
The upper point of the dose-response curve is undefined (where "too much" begins)
The <5 / 5-9 / 10+ categorical analysis was only a trend (P = 0.074); the graded relationship rests on the continuous meta-regression
How this entry was checked and changed
Content correction 2026-09-27
"<5 suboptimal, 5-9 moderate, ≥10 maximal" -> the three-level categorical analysis was a non-significant trend (P = 0.074); the significant findings are the continuous dose-response (+0.023 ES ≈ +0.37% per weekly set, P = 0.002) and higher vs lower volume (+3.9%, P = 0.03).
"≥10 sets/week maximizes hypertrophy" -> a working target derived from the graded relationship, not a proven threshold; 15 studies / 34 groups added.
Masters-recovery and compound-movement advice marked as not from this paper.