Executive Performance Brief #005
Your Annual Physical Isn’t a Performance Assessment
The Health and Performance Metrics Every Executive Over 40 Should Understand
Your annual physical can help identify disease and assess medical risk. But if your goal is to understand how well your body is actually functioning and where your health and physical capacity may be heading, you need a broader picture.
By Michael J. Padua Jr.
Most executives would never evaluate the health of their business using a single number.
Revenue matters, but revenue alone doesn't tell you about profitability. Profit doesn't tell you about cash flow. Cash flow doesn't tell you about employee retention, customer acquisition, debt, or future growth.
You need a dashboard.
Yet when it comes to our own bodies, we often accept remarkably little information.
"My physical was fine."
"My cholesterol was normal."
"My doctor said everything looks good."
That's valuable information. But it answers a particular set of medical questions.
It doesn't necessarily tell you how strong you are, how much aerobic capacity you possess, whether you're maintaining muscle, how your waist circumference is changing, how well you're recovering, whether your blood pressure is trending upward, or whether your physical capacity is improving or quietly declining.
There is a difference between screening for disease and measuring human performance.
After 40, I believe we should understand both.
Executive Insight
In the first four Executive Performance Briefs, we've been building a system.
-
- In Brief #001, I introduced the Executive Performance Pyramid and argued that sustainable performance requires more than simply exercising.
- In Brief #002, we explored cardiorespiratory fitness and VO₂ max (your aerobic engine).
- In Brief #003, we discussed strength, muscle, and power as your physical retirement account.
- And in Brief #004, we examined recovery, sleep, HRV, and the balance between training stress and adaptation.
Now comes the logical next question:
How do we know whether any of it is working?
This is where measurement becomes important.
I've spent more than 20 years coaching people through workouts. And yes, sets, repetitions, exercise selection, progressive overload, and cardiovascular programming matter enormously.
But the longer I've worked in this profession and the deeper my education in exercise physiology has become, the less interested I am in simply counting repetitions.
I want to understand the person performing them.
-
- What is happening to their cardiovascular fitness?
- What is happening to their strength?
- What is happening to body composition?
- What is happening to blood pressure?
- What direction are glucose regulation and lipids moving?
- Are they recovering?
- Are they maintaining lean tissue?
- Are they becoming more physically capable?
- And when appropriate, what can laboratory biomarkers add to that picture?
This is where fitness coaching can evolve into something much broader:
Human Performance Coaching.
Your Annual Physical Has an Important Job
Before going further, an important distinction needs to be made.
Your annual medical examination and your physician are not failing because they don't provide a comprehensive athletic-performance evaluation.
That isn't necessarily the purpose of the appointment.
Medicine and performance coaching have overlapping interests, but they have different scopes and responsibilities.
Your physician may be evaluating symptoms, family history, medications, disease risk, age-appropriate screening, blood pressure, laboratory findings, and whether additional medical evaluation or treatment is necessary.
Those are critically important responsibilities.
A qualified performance professional asks complementary questions:
-
- How physically capable are you?
- How strong are you relative to your needs?
- How is your aerobic fitness?
- How much are you moving?
- How is your training progressing?
- How well are you tolerating the program?
- Are you maintaining muscle while losing weight?
- Are lifestyle changes producing measurable improvements?
- And what information from your healthcare team should influence how your exercise program is designed?
The goal isn't replacing medical care.
It's connecting medical information, exercise physiology, objective fitness testing, lifestyle behavior, and coaching into a more complete picture.
That distinction is central to how I believe executive performance should be approached.
"Normal" Doesn't Always Answer the Question You Think It Does
One phrase deserves special attention:
"Everything was normal."
That's reassuring.
But what exactly does normal mean?
Laboratory reference intervals are useful clinical tools. They help healthcare professionals interpret measurements within appropriate medical context.
They aren't automatically synonymous with:
optimal physical performance, maximum longevity, ideal fitness, or zero future risk.
And the opposite is also important.
A value outside a laboratory reference interval doesn't automatically tell you what is wrong or what treatment you need.
That requires clinical interpretation.
This is where the health-optimization world sometimes gets into trouble.
A biomarker gets labeled "suboptimal."
Someone on social media declares everyone should have the same target.
Then a supplement, diet, hormone, medication, or testing package conveniently appears as the solution.
That's not the approach I advocate.
Data without context isn't optimization. It's just data.
Age matters.
Sex matters.
Medical history matters.
Medication use matters.
Family history matters.
Training status matters.
Testing conditions matter.
And perhaps most importantly, trends matter.
Trends Beat Snapshots
Imagine your company's revenue is $5 million.
Is that good?
You can't answer without context.
Was it $2 million three years ago?
Or $8 million?
Are margins increasing?
Are expenses increasing?
What happened last quarter?
Health data works similarly.
Suppose your blood pressure remains within an acceptable range but has increased steadily over several years.
That's different from a stable measurement.
Suppose your body weight hasn't changed in five years, but your waist circumference has increased while strength has declined.
The scale says nothing changed.
Your physiology may tell a different story.
Suppose your LDL cholesterol is relatively stable, but additional testing requested by your physician reveals a different pattern in ApoB.
Or your fasting glucose doesn't appear particularly remarkable, but HbA1c has been drifting upward.
Or perhaps every laboratory marker looks excellent, but your cardiorespiratory fitness is poor.
This is why I prefer asking two questions:
What is the number?
and
Which direction is it moving?
A single measurement is a photograph.
Repeated standardized measurements start creating a movie.
The Executive Performance Dashboard
Rather than chasing one "perfect" biomarker, I prefer thinking in systems.
For a 40-plus executive, that means examining several domains together.
Think of this as your:
Dashboard 1: Cardiometabolic Health
Let's begin with the measurements people are most likely to encounter during medical care.
Blood Pressure
Blood pressure is easy to overlook because there is nothing exciting about measuring it.
But that doesn't make it unimportant.
Blood pressure is one of the major modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, and its interpretation belongs in the broader context of cardiovascular risk, age, health history, and other clinical factors.
For performance coaching, I want to know about it for another reason as well:
Exercise prescription doesn't exist independently of cardiovascular status.
If blood pressure is elevated, that information can affect how we think about exercise intensity, progression, breathing strategies during resistance training, and the need for medical communication.
One office measurement also isn't always the complete picture. Depending on the individual, a healthcare professional may recommend repeated measurements or properly performed home blood-pressure monitoring.
The broader lesson is simple:
Know your blood pressure.
Don't wait until you're 65 to become interested in it.
Glucose, HbA1c, and Metabolic Direction
Next comes glucose regulation.
Fasting glucose provides one piece of information.
Hemoglobin A1c provides another.
HbA1c reflects glycation of hemoglobin and is commonly used clinically to estimate longer-term glucose exposure, generally reflecting approximately the preceding two to three months.
These measurements are not interchangeable, and interpretation belongs within medical context.
But glucose regulation deserves attention long before someone develops overt diabetes.
A major 2020 meta-analysis published in The BMJ examined 129 studies involving more than 10 million people. In the general population, prediabetes was associated with higher relative risks of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke compared with normoglycemia (Cai et al., 2020).
Again, that doesn't mean one mildly elevated measurement predicts someone's destiny.
It means metabolic direction matters.
For the executive spending eight to twelve hours per day seated, eating inconsistently, traveling frequently, sleeping inadequately, and exercising only a few hours per week, glucose regulation deserves a place on the dashboard.
And here's where coaching becomes useful.
Exercise isn't merely about calorie expenditure.
Skeletal muscle is an important site of glucose uptake.
Resistance training matters.
Aerobic exercise matters.
Daily movement matters.
Nutrition matters.
Sleep matters.
Suddenly, the biomarkers and the Executive Performance Pyramid begin connecting.
Lipids: Look Beyond "Good" and "Bad" Cholesterol
Most people know LDL-C and HDL-C.
Many know triglycerides.
Fewer understand what those numbers actually represent.
LDL-C measures the amount of cholesterol contained within LDL particles. ApoB, by contrast, reflects the number of circulating atherogenic lipoprotein particles because each of these particles contains one ApoB molecule.
Why might that distinction matter?
Because the amount of cholesterol carried inside particles and the number of atherogenic particles are related, but they are not always identical.
A large 2024 UK Biobank analysis involving nearly 294,000 adults aged 40–73 found substantial variability in ApoB at given levels of LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and triglycerides. ApoB retained information about incident atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk even after accounting for traditional lipid measures (Sniderman et al., 2024).
Similarly, research examining adults aged 50–75 found that discordantly high ApoB relative to LDL-C or non-HDL-C was associated with greater coronary atherosclerotic plaque burden (Su et al., 2022).
Does that mean everyone reading this needs to order ApoB tomorrow?
No.
It means the traditional lipid panel may be part of a larger cardiovascular-risk conversation, and additional biomarkers can sometimes provide useful information when a physician determines they are appropriate.
That's an important difference.
More testing isn't automatically better testing.
Useful testing is testing that can meaningfully inform a decision.
Dashboard 2: Body Composition
For decades, fitness has been dominated by one measurement:
body weight.
Body weight is useful.
It is also incomplete.
Two 200-pound men can possess dramatically different amounts of muscle, fat, visceral adiposity, strength, and cardiovascular fitness.
Even BMI, while valuable at a population level and useful clinically, cannot tell us where fat is distributed or distinguish muscle from adipose tissue.
This is where waist circumference becomes useful.
A 2020 consensus statement published in Nature Reviews Endocrinology concluded that waist circumference provides additional information beyond BMI for identifying cardiometabolic risk and recommended that waist circumference be routinely measured in clinical practice (Ross et al., 2020).
This matters because where fat is stored matters, particularly visceral adiposity.
There is also an encouraging practical point.
The same consensus review noted evidence that exercise can reduce waist circumference and visceral adipose tissue even in situations where substantial weight loss does not occur (Ross et al., 2020).
Think about what that means.
Someone could begin training.
Their waist circumference decreases.
Fitness improves.
Strength improves.
Blood pressure improves.
Metabolic health improves.
But the scale barely changes.
If body weight is your only KPI, you might conclude:
"The program isn't working."
That's exactly why we need a dashboard.
Muscle Matters Too
Brief #003 was built around this idea:
Strength is your retirement account.
When evaluating body composition after 40, I'm not only interested in reducing excessive body fat.
I'm interested in what we're preserving.
If someone loses 20 pounds, that's not automatically a successful outcome from a performance perspective.
What did they lose?
Fat?
Lean tissue?
Both?
What happened to strength?
What happened to energy?
What happened to aerobic capacity?
This becomes particularly important as adults get older because muscle and strength represent part of the physical reserve we're trying to carry into later decades.
That's why I don't want an executive simply becoming lighter.
I want them becoming:
leaner when appropriate, stronger, fitter, and more capable.
Those are different objectives.
Dashboard 3: Cardiorespiratory Capacity
This is where Brief #002 becomes relevant again.
You can have excellent routine blood work and still have poor cardiorespiratory fitness.
That's not a trivial observation.
A 2024 overview of meta-analyses published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine synthesized evidence representing more than 20.9 million observations from 199 cohort studies. Higher cardiorespiratory fitness was consistently associated with lower risks of mortality and multiple chronic conditions (Lang et al., 2024).
That is why I believe fitness itself belongs on the health dashboard.
Not simply:
"Do you exercise?"
But:
How fit are you?
Those are different questions.
Two people may both report exercising four days per week.
One may have excellent aerobic capacity.
The other may not.
Exercise behavior tells me what you're doing.
Fitness testing tells me something about the adaptation you've created.
Depending on the setting and individual, cardiorespiratory fitness can be assessed through laboratory VO₂ testing, clinical exercise testing, validated submaximal protocols, field assessments, or carefully interpreted wearable estimates.
The method matters.
But the principle matters more:
Measure capacity, not just participation.
Dashboard 4: Musculoskeletal Capacity
Now consider strength.
Again, don't simply ask:
"Do you lift weights?"
Ask:
Are you strong?
And perhaps even more importantly:
Are you maintaining strength over time?
Resistance training itself has been associated with meaningful long-term health outcomes. A 2022 systematic review and meta-analysis found that participation in resistance training was associated with lower all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality compared with performing none, although the evidence was observational and should not be interpreted as proving causation (Shailendra et al., 2022).
For performance assessment, there are numerous options.
Grip strength.
Push-up capacity.
Sit-to-stand performance.
Appropriate submaximal strength testing.
Relative strength.
Lower-body strength.
Pulling and pushing capacity.
Loaded carries.
For some individuals, power or movement-speed testing may also become useful.
The goal isn't creating a competition.
The goal is establishing a baseline.
Because if your strength is declining every year, I'd rather identify that at 48 than discover its consequences at 78.
Dashboard 5: Recovery and Lifestyle
Then we arrive back at Brief #004.
How are you sleeping?
What does your resting heart rate look like?
What is your HRV trend, if measured reliably?
How much do you move outside structured exercise?
How much time do you spend sitting?
What does your training load look like?
How do you feel?
That last question may sound less scientific.
It isn't irrelevant.
Objective and subjective information often complement one another.
And daily movement deserves particular attention for executives.
Ekelund and colleagues (2019) conducted a harmonized meta-analysis using accelerometer-measured activity in more than 36,000 middle-aged and older adults. Higher levels of physical activity—regardless of intensity—were associated with lower mortality risk, while greater sedentary time was associated with higher risk (Ekelund et al., 2019).
This is why I don't want someone thinking:
"I trained for an hour this morning, so sitting for the next ten hours doesn't matter."
The workout matters.
So does the rest of your day.
The Problem With Chasing 100 Biomarkers
This is where I want to separate evidence-based performance coaching from the growing biohacking marketplace.
More data can be useful.
But more data also creates more opportunities for noise.
If you measure enough variables, eventually something will appear unusual.
Then what?
Do you understand the biological variability of the test?
Was the measurement standardized?
Was the person fasting?
Had they exercised intensely the previous day?
Were they dehydrated?
Is the difference clinically meaningful?
Is the biomarker validated for the conclusion you're drawing from it?
Will knowing the result change anything?
Those are more important questions than:
"How many biomarkers can we measure?"
There is a tendency in health optimization to treat the largest laboratory panel as the most sophisticated approach.
I disagree.
Sophisticated coaching isn't collecting the most data. It's identifying the data that matters, interpreting it within the appropriate scope, and using it to make better decisions.
And sometimes the correct decision is:
Talk to your physician.
That is not a limitation of performance coaching.
That's good performance coaching.
Coach's Perspective: Why My Approach Has Changed
When I started personal training more than two decades ago, assessments looked very different.
Weight.
Body-fat percentage.
Circumference measurements.
Maybe a cardiovascular test.
Maybe a strength assessment.
Then we'd build a workout.
Those measurements still have value.
But my understanding of the person behind those numbers has changed considerably.
The more I studied exercise physiology and the more years I spent coaching people through different stages of their lives, the more I realized that a workout is only one intervention within a much larger physiological system.
Today, I'm interested in connecting more dots.
I don't simply want to know whether someone lost ten pounds.
I want to know:
Did we preserve muscle while doing it?
I don't only want to know whether someone completed three cardio workouts.
Did cardiorespiratory fitness actually improve?
I don't simply want to know that someone lifts weights.
Is strength increasing or declining?
I don't just want to see a cholesterol number.
What does the overall cardiovascular-risk picture look like, and is there information the client's physician wants us to consider when programming exercise?
I don't only want to know that someone sleeps seven hours.
Are they recovering well enough to tolerate the training load we're prescribing?
That is where my role has evolved.
I'm still coaching exercise.
I'm still teaching technique.
I'm still programming sets and repetitions.
But those sets and repetitions exist inside a much bigger system.
I don't want to simply count your reps. I want to understand what those reps are supposed to accomplish and whether your physiology is actually moving in the direction we intended.
That's the difference between completing workouts and building a performance strategy.
Research Summary
No Single Number Defines Health
If there is one scientific message I want you to take from this Brief, it's this:
There is no single health score.
Cardiorespiratory fitness tells us something important.
Strength tells us something different.
Waist circumference adds information that body weight and BMI alone can miss.
Glucose regulation provides insight into metabolic health.
ApoB can provide information about atherogenic particle burden that may not always be apparent from LDL-C alone.
Physical activity and sedentary behavior provide another layer.
Sleep and recovery add still more context.
None replaces the others.
That's the entire philosophy behind the Executive Performance Pyramid.
Human beings are systems.
So measure the system.
From Data to Decisions
This is where biomarkers become useful.
Not when they create a 40-page report nobody understands.
Not when they create anxiety.
Not when they become an excuse to sell a supplement.
They're useful when they change a decision.
Imagine an executive begins a structured program.
At baseline, we establish appropriate measures of:
Body composition.
Waist circumference.
Strength.
Cardiorespiratory fitness.
Blood pressure.
Daily movement.
Sleep and recovery.
And, in coordination with appropriate medical care, relevant laboratory biomarkers.
Then we train.
We improve nutrition.
We build movement into the day.
We improve sleep.
We develop strength.
We build aerobic capacity.
Several months later, we reassess.
Now we can ask:
Did waist circumference change?
Did strength increase?
Did aerobic capacity improve?
Did resting heart rate change?
How is blood pressure trending?
What happened to glucose-related markers?
What happened to the lipid profile?
Did lean mass remain stable?
How does the person feel?
That's where measurement becomes powerful.
It closes the feedback loop.
Assess.
Identify.
Intervene.
Monitor.
Reassess.
Adjust.
That is the same basic logic used throughout high-performance sport: profiling, benchmarking, monitoring, and adjusting training based on response rather than assuming that completing a program guarantees the desired adaptation. NSCA's sport-science framework similarly emphasizes performance dimensions, profiling and benchmarking, key performance indicators, and training-load monitoring.
Executives don't need to become professional athletes.
But they can benefit enormously from a professional process.
The Boundary That Makes This Approach Stronger
Biomarker-informed coaching should never mean practicing medicine without a medical license.
If laboratory testing suggests disease, requires diagnosis, raises medication questions, or reveals something clinically concerning, that belongs with the appropriate healthcare professional.
A coach should not be diagnosing diabetes.
A coach should not be prescribing cholesterol medication.
A coach should not be independently changing someone's antihypertensive treatment.
What a qualified exercise professional can do is understand enough physiology to communicate intelligently with the healthcare team and build an exercise and lifestyle strategy around the information provided.
That's an important distinction.
Collaboration isn't a weakness.
It is what sophisticated performance care should look like.
Physician.
Exercise professional.
Registered dietitian when appropriate.
Physical therapist when needed.
Other qualified professionals depending on the individual.
The executive sits at the center.
The goal isn't owning every piece of the process. It's making the pieces work together.
Performance Metric: HbA1c
For this Brief's Performance Metric, let's look more closely at hemoglobin A1c.
Most people think of HbA1c as a diabetes test.
That's certainly an important clinical use.
But understanding what it measures helps explain why it can be useful within a broader cardiometabolic picture.
Red blood cells contain hemoglobin.
Glucose circulating in the bloodstream can bind to hemoglobin through a process known as glycation.
HbA1c measures the percentage of hemoglobin that has become glycated and therefore provides information about glucose exposure over an extended period rather than at one isolated moment.
That makes it fundamentally different from fasting glucose.
Fasting glucose is more like a photograph.
HbA1c provides a broader view of recent glucose exposure.
But even here, context matters.
HbA1c can be influenced by conditions affecting red blood cell lifespan and other clinical variables, which is another reason laboratory results should be interpreted appropriately rather than reduced to a social-media "optimal range."
The performance takeaway is not:
Lower your HbA1c at all costs.
It is:
Understand your metabolic health and its trend.
The updated meta-analysis by Cai et al. (2020), involving more than 10 million individuals, found that prediabetes was associated with higher risks of cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality.
That makes glucose regulation worth paying attention to before metabolic disease becomes advanced.
Executive Action Plan: Build Your Baseline
Don't finish this article and order 50 laboratory tests.
Instead, build your first Executive Performance Scorecard.
Start with information you already have.
Cardiometabolic
Most recent blood pressure.
Total cholesterol.
LDL-C.
HDL-C.
Triglycerides.
Fasting glucose.
HbA1c, if measured.
Other physician-directed markers such as ApoB when appropriate.
Body Composition
Body weight.
Waist circumference.
Body composition, if measured using a reasonably standardized method.
Cardiovascular Performance
Resting heart rate.
Estimated or measured cardiorespiratory fitness.
VO₂ max if available.
Strength and Function
One or more standardized strength measures.
Grip strength if available.
A lower-body measure.
An upper-body measure.
Recovery
Average sleep duration.
Resting heart-rate trend.
HRV trend if you're already measuring it reliably.
Subjective energy and recovery.
Lifestyle
Average daily movement.
Weekly resistance training.
Weekly aerobic exercise.
Sedentary time.
Then put every measurement into one of three categories:
KNOWN
UNKNOWN
NEEDS FOLLOW-UP
Don't diagnose yourself.
Don't panic about one number.
And don't attempt to optimize everything simultaneously.
First, establish the baseline.
Coach's Challenge
Here is your challenge for this Brief.
Find your last three years of health data.
Pull your previous physicals or laboratory reports if you have access to them.
Don't only look at the most recent result.
Look for trends.
What happened to your blood pressure?
Waist circumference?
Body weight?
Fasting glucose?
HbA1c?
LDL-C?
Triglycerides?
Resting heart rate?
Then add the performance metrics that probably aren't on those reports.
What happened to your strength?
Your aerobic capacity?
Your movement?
Your sleep?
Your physical capability?
And ask yourself one question:
Am I objectively becoming more capable...or am I simply assuming that because nothing has gone wrong yet, everything is going well?
That is a very different standard.
Final Thoughts
Your annual physical matters.
Routine medical care matters.
Blood work matters.
Exercise matters.
But none of them, individually, gives us the entire picture.
That's why I believe the future of executive performance coaching isn't another workout app telling you to perform three sets of ten.
It's not a wearable telling you whether you're "ready."
And it isn't a giant laboratory panel pretending every number needs optimization.
It's integration.
Exercise physiology.
Strength.
Cardiorespiratory fitness.
Body composition.
Recovery.
Movement.
Behavior.
Biomarkers.
Medical information.
And professional coaching.
All connected around one question:
What does this individual need to remain healthy, capable, and high-performing for as long as possible?
After more than 20 years in personal training, that's where I see my role today.
Yes, I still count reps.
But the rep is the smallest part of the conversation.
I'm interested in the system behind it.
I'm interested in what happens to your blood pressure, strength, aerobic capacity, body composition, recovery, metabolic health, and physical capability as a result of the decisions we're making.
I'm interested in whether you're building a larger physiological reserve at 50 instead of simply trying to avoid decline.
And I'm interested in whether the strategy is actually working.
Because the ultimate goal isn't to collect more data.
It's to use the right data to make better decisions.
Don't measure everything because you can. Measure what matters, understand the trend, and use it to build a body capable of supporting the life you're working so hard to create.
Coach Mike Padua
For more than 20 years, I've helped busy professionals, executives, and athletes improve their strength, energy, and long-term health through evidence-based performance coaching. My approach combines exercise science, accountability, and personalized strategies to help you perform at your best—in the gym, at work, and in life. Discover how a smarter, science-driven approach can help you reach your next level...more.
Apply For Coaching
Your body is your greatest asset. Invest in it with the same intention you bring to your career, business, and life. Complete your application to discover if PPI Human Performance Coaching is the right fit for your next level of performance.
References
Cai, X., Zhang, Y., Li, M., Wu, J. H. Y., Mai, L., Li, J., Yang, Y., Hu, Y., & Huang, Y. (2020). Association between prediabetes and risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease: Updated meta-analysis. BMJ, 370, m2297. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2297
Ekelund, U., Tarp, J., Steene-Johannessen, J., Hansen, B. H., Jefferis, B., Fagerland, M. W., Whincup, P., Diaz, K. M., Hooker, S. P., Chernofsky, A., Larson, M. G., Spartano, N., Vasan, R. S., Dohrn, I.-M., Hagströmer, M., Edwardson, C., Yates, T., Shiroma, E., Anderssen, S. A., & Lee, I.-M. (2019). Dose-response associations between accelerometry measured physical activity and sedentary time and all cause mortality: Systematic review and harmonised meta-analysis. BMJ, 366, l4570. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4570
Lang, J. J., Prince, S. A., Merucci, K., Cadenas-Sanchez, C., Chaput, J.-P., Fraser, B. J., Manyanga, T., McGrath, R., Ortega, F. B., Singh, B., & Tomkinson, G. R. (2024). Cardiorespiratory fitness is a strong and consistent predictor of morbidity and mortality among adults: An overview of meta-analyses representing over 20.9 million observations from 199 unique cohort studies. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 58(10), 556–566. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2023-107849
Ross, R., Neeland, I. J., Yamashita, S., Shai, I., Seidell, J., Magni, P., Santos, R. D., Arsenault, B., Cuevas, A., Hu, F. B., Griffin, B. A., Zambon, A., Barter, P., Fruchart, J.-C., Eckel, R. H., Matsuzawa, Y., & Després, J.-P. (2020). Waist circumference as a vital sign in clinical practice: A consensus statement from the IAS and ICCR Working Group on Visceral Obesity. Nature Reviews Endocrinology, 16, 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41574-019-0310-7
Shailendra, P., Baldock, K. L., Li, L. S. K., Bennie, J. A., & Boyle, T. (2022). Resistance training and mortality risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 63(2), 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2022.03.020
Sniderman, A. D., Thanassoulis, G., Glavinovic, T., Navar, A. M., Pencina, M., Catapano, A., & Ference, B. A. (2024). Discordance among apoB, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides: Implications for cardiovascular prevention. European Heart Journal. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38700053/
Su, X., Cai, X., Pan, Y., Sun, J., Jing, J., Wang, M., Meng, X., Wang, Y., Wei, T., & He, Y. (2022). Discordance of apolipoprotein B with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and coronary atherosclerosis. European Journal of Preventive Cardiology, 29(18), 2349–2358. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwac223