Rigorous evidence synthesis, translated into decisions: sourced, current, accountable, and applied to real goals.
Fitness advice is a low-trust market: single studies over-generalised, influencer certainty, and AI summaries without citations. This platform is rebuilding systematic-review methodology at scale. Two different reviewer systems work independently, their differences are resolved in a structured process, and an independent check is used when disagreement remains. Findings stay unpublished until the full review is complete.
The aim is to capture and index every relevant study on each trainable quality of fitness into one living evidence base — a literature review and a network meta-analysis that grow transparently as the science does, working toward all of the available literature rather than a convenient sample. The principal limitation is the paywalled literature that cannot yet be accessed, which is stated on every page. A saved profile can define a prespecified subgroup question using age, sex, baseline fitness and training history. It never changes the published primary result: personalised analysis becomes available only after it has been separately tested and approved.
The site is organised as one journey in four steps — 01 goals (what you’re training for), 02 analyse (what the evidence says works), 03 periodise (how to structure it) and 04 plan (a week-by-week programme). Every page can be read two ways: as an athlete, in plain language, or as a scientist, with the full data and methods. You choose once on your first visit and can switch any time from the top of the page — the underlying evidence is the same either way.