Backed by science

The research behind Ownit

How many sets, how close to failure, how much protein, how much energy: Ownit's rules for training and nutrition rest on the studies on this page. Here is which work feeds into which feature.

Updated 7 October 2026

120
studies and reviews
45
of them meta-analyses, reviews and position stands
12
research fields

Overview

One dot per study

Schoenfeld, Ogborn & Krieger 2017 · J Sports SciBaz-Valle, Fontes-Villalba & Santos-Concejero 2021 · J Strength Cond ResIsraetel et al. 2021 · RP StrengthIsraetel et al. 2020 · Strength Cond JKrieger 2010 · J Strength Cond ResSchoenfeld et al. 2019 · Med Sci Sports ExercBaz-Valle et al. 2022 · J Hum KinetFigueiredo, de Salles & Trajano 2018 · Sports MedRalston et al. 2017 · Sports MedPelland et al. 2026 · Sports MedVolume10 sourcesSchoenfeld, Ogborn & Krieger 2016 · Sports MedSchoenfeld, Grgic & Krieger 2019 · J Sports SciGrgic et al. 2018 · Sports MedSchoenfeld et al. 2015 · J Strength Cond ResZaroni et al. 2019 · J Strength Cond ResRalston et al. 2018 · Sports Med OpenColquhoun et al. 2018 · J Strength Cond ResMacDougall et al. 1995 · Can J Appl PhysiolFrequency8 sourcesZourdos et al. 2016 · J Strength Cond ResHelms et al. 2016 · Strength Cond JRefalo et al. 2023 · Sports MedRobinson et al. 2024 · Sports MedHackett et al. 2012 · J Sports SciSteele et al. 2017 · PeerJZourdos et al. 2021 · J Strength Cond ResHalperin et al. 2022 · Sports MedGrgic et al. 2022 · J Sport Health SciVieira et al. 2021 · J Strength Cond ResDavies et al. 2016 · Sports MedRIR11 sourcesHelms et al. 2018 · Front PhysiolGraham & Cleather 2021 · J Strength Cond ResPlotkin et al. 2022 · PeerJSchoenfeld et al. 2017 · J Strength Cond ResSchoenfeld et al. 2021 · Sports (Basel)Lopez et al. 2021 · Med Sci Sports ExercCurrier et al. 2023 · Br J Sports MedLarsen, Kristiansen & van den Tillaar 2021 · PeerJHickmott et al. 2022 · Sports Med OpenACSM 2009 · Med Sci Sports ExercProgression10 sourcesSchoenfeld et al. 2016 · J Strength Cond ResHenselmans & Schoenfeld 2014 · Sports MedGrgic et al. 2018 · Sports MedGrgic et al. 2017 · Eur J Sport SciSinger et al. 2024 · Front Sports Act LivingWillardson 2006 · J Strength Cond Resde Salles et al. 2009 · Sports MedAhtiainen et al. 2005 · J Strength Cond ResRest8 sourcesBurke, Wang & Sevick 2011 · J Am Diet AssocHarvey et al. 2019 · Obesity (Silver Spring)Hollis et al. 2008 · Am J Prev MedBerry, Kassavou & Sutton 2021 · Obes RevPainter et al. 2017 · J Med Internet ResPeterson et al. 2014 · Obesity (Silver Spring)Krukowski et al. 2013 · Health PsycholMichie et al. 2009 · Health PsycholZheng et al. 2015 · Obesity (Silver Spring)VanWormer et al. 2008 · Int J Behav Nutr Phys ActSteinberg et al. 2015 · J Acad Nutr DietTracking11 sourcesMorton et al. 2018 · Br J Sports MedJäger et al. 2017 · J Int Soc Sports NutrTagawa et al. 2021 · Nutr RevNunes et al. 2022 · J Cachexia Sarcopenia MuscleCermak et al. 2012 · Am J Clin NutrSchoenfeld & Aragon 2018 · J Int Soc Sports NutrThomas, Erdman & Burke 2016 · J Acad Nutr DietBauer et al. 2013 · J Am Med Dir AssocDeutz et al. 2014 · Clin NutrMoore et al. 2015 · J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med SciLongland et al. 2016 · Am J Clin NutrHudson et al. 2020 · Adv NutrProtein12 sourcesMifflin et al. 1990 · Am J Clin NutrFrankenfield, Roth-Yousey & Compher 2005 · J Am Diet AssocHarris & Benedict 1918 · Proc Natl Acad Sci U S ACunningham 1980 · Am J Clin Nutrten Haaf & Weijs 2014 · PLoS OneJagim et al. 2018 · J Strength Cond ResWeijs 2008 · Am J Clin NutrMadden, Mulrooney & Shah 2016 · J Hum Nutr DietAinsworth et al. 2011 · Med Sci Sports ExercHerrmann et al. 2024 · J Sport Health SciBMR10 sourcesHall et al. 2011 · LancetHall et al. 2012 · Am J Clin NutrThomas et al. 2013 · Int J Obes (Lond)Wishnofsky 1958 · Am J Clin NutrHall 2008 · Int J Obes (Lond)Hall 2010 · Am J Physiol Endocrinol MetabRosenbaum & Leibel 2010 · Int J Obes (Lond)Müller et al. 2015 · Am J Clin NutrDulloo et al. 2012 · Obes RevFothergill et al. 2016 · Obesity (Silver Spring)Trexler, Smith-Ryan & Norton 2014 · J Int Soc Sports NutrLevine, Eberhardt & Jensen 1999 · ScienceEnergy balance12 sourcesKalman 1960 · J Basic EngOrsama et al. 2014 · Obes FactsTuricchi et al. 2020 · PLoS OneStevens et al. 2006 · Int J Obes (Lond)Kreitzman, Coxon & Szaz 1992 · Am J Clin NutrFernández-Elías et al. 2015 · Eur J Appl PhysiolHall & Chow 2011 · Am J Clin NutrChow & Hall 2008 · PLoS Comput BiolCheuvront et al. 2004 · Int J Sport Nutr Exerc MetabWeight trend9 sourcesGarthe et al. 2011 · Int J Sport Nutr Exerc MetabMurphy & Koehler 2022 · Scand J Med Sci SportsHelms, Aragon & Fitschen 2014 · J Int Soc Sports NutrMettler, Mitchell & Tipton 2010 · Med Sci Sports ExercChaston, Dixon & O'Brien 2007 · Int J Obes (Lond)Hall 2007 · Br J NutrHeymsfield et al. 2014 · Obes RevHector & Phillips 2018 · Int J Sport Nutr Exerc MetabAreta et al. 2014 · Am J Physiol Endocrinol MetabBurke et al. 2021 · Curr Sports Med RepBarakat et al. 2020 · Strength Cond JRate of loss11 sourcesIraki et al. 2019 · Sports (Basel)Slater et al. 2019 · Front NutrRozenek et al. 2002 · J Sports Med Phys FitnessBray et al. 2012 · JAMAGarthe, Raastad & Sundgot-Borgen 2011 · Appl Physiol Nutr MetabLambert, Frank & Evans 2004 · Sports MedLeaf & Antonio 2017 · Int J Exerc SciRoberts et al. 2020 · J Hum KinetSurplus8 sourcesOwnit120 sources
  • Training volume10
  • Training frequency8
  • Proximity to failure11
  • Progression and autoregulation10
  • Rest between sets8
  • Self-monitoring11
  • Protein12
  • Resting and total energy expenditure10
  • Energy balance and adaptation12
  • Weight trend and noise9
  • Rate of loss and muscle retention11
  • Building muscle in a surplus8

Training

Training volume

The AI workout plan spreads weekly sets per muscle by your experience and stays under fixed ceilings. The volume overview shows each muscle group against MEV, MAV and MRV.

Feeds into:AI workout planEverything at a glanceAI coach

  1. Volume and frequency show distinct dose-response curves

    Pelland et al. (2026). The Resistance Training Dose Response: Meta-Regressions Exploring the Effects of Weekly Volume and Frequency on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gains. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-025-02344-w

    Meta-analysis
  2. 12-20 weekly sets per muscle suggested for trained men

    Baz-Valle et al. (2022). A Systematic Review of the Effects of Different Resistance Training Volumes on Muscle Hypertrophy. J Hum Kinet. doi:10.2478/hukin-2022-0017

    Systematic review
  3. Sets taken near failure work as a measure of volume

    Baz-Valle, Fontes-Villalba & Santos-Concejero (2021). Total Number of Sets as a Training Volume Quantification Method for Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002776

    Systematic review
  4. More weekly sets per muscle gave graded gains in muscle size

    Schoenfeld, Ogborn & Krieger (2017). Dose-response relationship between weekly resistance training volume and increases in muscle mass: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sports Sci. doi:10.1080/02640414.2016.1210197

    Meta-analysis
  5. Strength gains rose in graded steps with weekly sets

    Ralston et al. (2017). The Effect of Weekly Set Volume on Strength Gain: A Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-017-0762-7

    Meta-analysis
  6. Multiple sets gave about 40% larger hypertrophy effects than one set

    Krieger (2010). Single vs. Multiple Sets of Resistance Exercise for Muscle Hypertrophy: A Meta-Analysis. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0b013e3181d4d436

    Meta-analysis
  7. Volume landmarks MEV, MAV and MRV for hypertrophy training

    Israetel et al. (2021). Scientific Principles of Hypertrophy Training. RP Strength.

    Review
  8. Adding sets is probably the best-supported weekly progression

    Israetel et al. (2020). Mesocycle Progression in Hypertrophy: Volume Versus Intensity. Strength Cond J. doi:10.1519/ssc.0000000000000518

    Review
  9. Higher volume gave more muscle size and similar strength gains

    Schoenfeld et al. (2019). Resistance Training Volume Enhances Muscle Hypertrophy but Not Strength in Trained Men. Med Sci Sports Exerc. doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000001764

    Randomised trial
  10. Clear dose-response link between training volume and hypertrophy

    Figueiredo, de Salles & Trajano (2018). Volume for Muscle Hypertrophy and Health Outcomes: The Most Effective Variable in Resistance Training. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-017-0793-0

    Review

Training frequency

The split templates for two to six days are built so most muscles get trained twice a week. With three days they combine a push, a pull and a full-body day.

Feeds into:AI workout planAI coach

  1. At equal volume, frequency barely changed muscle growth

    Schoenfeld, Grgic & Krieger (2019). How many times per week should a muscle be trained to maximize muscle hypertrophy? A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies examining the effects of resistance training frequency. J Sports Sci. doi:10.1080/02640414.2018.1555906

    Meta-analysis
  2. Higher frequency raised strength, mainly through added volume

    Grgic et al. (2018). Effect of Resistance Training Frequency on Gains in Muscular Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-018-0872-x

    Meta-analysis
  3. At equal volume, higher frequency gave no strength advantage

    Ralston et al. (2018). Weekly Training Frequency Effects on Strength Gain: A Meta-Analysis. Sports Med Open. doi:10.1186/s40798-018-0149-9

    Meta-analysis
  4. At equal volume, training twice weekly beat once weekly

    Schoenfeld, Ogborn & Krieger (2016). Effects of Resistance Training Frequency on Measures of Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-016-0543-8

    Meta-analysis
  5. Similar strength; some muscles thicker with higher frequency

    Zaroni et al. (2019). High Resistance-Training Frequency Enhances Muscle Thickness in Resistance-Trained Men. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002643

    Randomised trial
  6. Volume, not frequency, tracked maximal strength gains

    Colquhoun et al. (2018). Training Volume, Not Frequency, Indicative of Maximal Strength Adaptations to Resistance Training. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002414

    Randomised trial
  7. Training three times weekly gave partly greater growth than once

    Schoenfeld et al. (2015). Influence of Resistance Training Frequency on Muscular Adaptations in Well-Trained Men. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000000970

    Randomised trial
  8. Muscle protein synthesis peaked near 24 h, near baseline by 36 h

    MacDougall et al. (1995). The Time Course for Elevated Muscle Protein Synthesis Following Heavy Resistance Exercise. Can J Appl Physiol. doi:10.1139/h95-038

    Randomised trial

Proximity to failure

Every exercise in the plan has an RIR target between 1 and 4, 2 to 4 for beginners. Your RIR entry decides whether the weight may go up.

Feeds into:Progression coachAI workout plan

  1. Hypertrophy improved nearer failure; strength was similar across RIR

    Robinson et al. (2024). Exploring the Dose–Response Relationship Between Estimated Resistance Training Proximity to Failure, Strength Gain, and Muscle Hypertrophy: A Series of Meta-Regressions. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-024-02069-2

    Meta-analysis
  2. Training to failure showed no hypertrophy advantage

    Refalo et al. (2023). Influence of Resistance Training Proximity-to-Failure on Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-022-01784-y

    Meta-analysis
  3. Rep-to-failure estimates were imperfect regardless of training background

    Halperin et al. (2022). Accuracy in Predicting Repetitions to Task Failure in Resistance Exercise: A Scoping Review and Exploratory Meta-analysis. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-021-01559-x

    Meta-analysis
  4. Training to failure did not appear required for strength or size

    Grgic et al. (2022). Effects of resistance training performed to repetition failure or non-failure on muscular strength and hypertrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Sport Health Sci. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2021.01.007

    Meta-analysis
  5. No hypertrophy difference between failure and non-failure at equal volume

    Vieira et al. (2021). Effects of Resistance Training Performed to Failure or Not to Failure on Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Power Output: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000003936

    Meta-analysis
  6. Failure and non-failure training gave similar strength gains

    Davies et al. (2016). Effect of Training Leading to Repetition Failure on Muscular Strength: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-015-0451-3

    Meta-analysis
  7. RIR predictions were more accurate close to failure

    Zourdos et al. (2021). Proximity to Failure and Total Repetitions Performed in a Set Influences Accuracy of Intraset Repetitions in Reserve-Based Rating of Perceived Exertion. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002995

    Cohort study
  8. Predicting reps to failure is imperfect, improves with experience

    Steele et al. (2017). Ability to predict repetitions to momentary failure is not perfectly accurate, though improves with resistance training experience. PeerJ. doi:10.7717/peerj.4105

    Cohort study
  9. RIR-based effort scale checked against bar velocity

    Zourdos et al. (2016). Novel Resistance Training–Specific Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale Measuring Repetitions in Reserve. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000001049

    Method
  10. How to apply the RIR-based exertion scale in training

    Helms et al. (2016). Application of the Repetitions in Reserve-Based Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale for Resistance Training. Strength Cond J. doi:10.1519/ssc.0000000000000218

    Review
  11. Estimated-repetitions-to-failure scale was reliable and valid

    Hackett et al. (2012). A novel scale to assess resistance-exercise effort. J Sports Sci. doi:10.1080/02640414.2012.710757

    Method

Progression and autoregulation

Ownit raises the reps first and then the weight, in steps of your equipment and normally by at most 5 percent. If an exercise stalls for two workouts, it adds a set.

Feeds into:Progression coach

  1. Higher loads ranked best for strength, multiple sets for hypertrophy

    Currier et al. (2023). Resistance training prescription for muscle strength and hypertrophy in healthy adults: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2023-106807

    Meta-analysis
  2. Autoregulated vs percentage-based loading: no significant strength difference

    Hickmott et al. (2022). The Effect of Load and Volume Autoregulation on Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Sports Med Open. doi:10.1186/s40798-021-00404-9

    Meta-analysis
  3. Hypertrophy was load independent; strength favored heavier loads

    Lopez et al. (2021). Resistance Training Load Effects on Muscle Hypertrophy and Strength Gain: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000002585

    Meta-analysis
  4. Autoregulation methods may help enhance maximal strength

    Larsen, Kristiansen & van den Tillaar (2021). Effects of subjective and objective autoregulation methods for intensity and volume on enhancing maximal strength during resistance-training interventions: a systematic review. PeerJ. doi:10.7717/peerj.10663

    Systematic review
  5. Heavy loads built more strength; hypertrophy was similar across load ranges

    Schoenfeld et al. (2017). Strength and Hypertrophy Adaptations Between Low- vs. High-Load Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002200

    Meta-analysis
  6. ACSM recommendations for progression in resistance training

    ACSM (2009). Progression Models in Resistance Training for Healthy Adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e3181915670

    Position stand
  7. Progressing reps or load both enhanced muscular adaptations

    Plotkin et al. (2022). Progressive overload without progressing load? The effects of load or repetition progression on muscular adaptations. PeerJ. doi:10.7717/peerj.14142

    Randomised trial
  8. RIR-based loading gave larger 12-week strength gains than fixed loads

    Graham & Cleather (2021). Autoregulation by “Repetitions in Reserve” Leads to Greater Improvements in Strength Over a 12-Week Training Program Than Fixed Loading. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000003164

    Randomised trial
  9. Muscular adaptations occur across a wide spectrum of loads

    Schoenfeld et al. (2021). Loading Recommendations for Muscle Strength, Hypertrophy, and Local Endurance: A Re-Examination of the Repetition Continuum. Sports (Basel). doi:10.3390/sports9020032

    Review
  10. RPE- and %1RM-based loading both worked, RPE slightly ahead

    Helms et al. (2018). RPE vs. Percentage 1RM Loading in Periodized Programs Matched for Sets and Repetitions. Front Physiol. doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00247

    Cohort study

Rest between sets

Compound lifts get at least 120 seconds of rest, heavy sets of up to 6 reps at least 180, isolation exercises at least 60.

Feeds into:AI workout plan

  1. Small hypertrophy benefit for rests longer than 60 seconds

    Singer et al. (2024). Give it a rest: a systematic review with Bayesian meta-analysis on the effect of inter-set rest interval duration on muscle hypertrophy. Front Sports Act Living. doi:10.3389/fspor.2024.1429789

    Systematic review
  2. Trained lifters likely need rests over 2 minutes for maximal strength

    Grgic et al. (2018). Effects of Rest Interval Duration in Resistance Training on Measures of Muscular Strength: A Systematic Review. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-017-0788-x

    Systematic review
  3. Both short and long rests can support hypertrophy

    Grgic et al. (2017). The effects of short versus long inter‐set rest intervals in resistance training on measures of muscle hypertrophy: A systematic review. Eur J Sport Sci. doi:10.1080/17461391.2017.1340524

    Systematic review
  4. Three-minute rests beat one-minute rests for strength and thickness

    Schoenfeld et al. (2016). Longer Interset Rest Periods Enhance Muscle Strength and Hypertrophy in Resistance-Trained Men. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000001272

    Randomised trial
  5. Hypertrophy does not appear to require shorter rest intervals

    Henselmans & Schoenfeld (2014). The Effect of Inter-Set Rest Intervals on Resistance Exercise-Induced Muscle Hypertrophy. Sports Med. doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0228-0

    Review
  6. Rest between sets shapes efficiency, safety and effectiveness of training

    de Salles et al. (2009). Rest Interval between Sets in Strength Training. Sports Med. doi:10.2165/11315230-000000000-00000

    Review
  7. Factors that determine the length of the rest between sets

    Willardson (2006). A Brief Review: Factors Affecting the Length of the Rest Interval Between Resistance Exercise Sets. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/r-17995.1

    Review
  8. 2 vs 5 minute rests gave similar strength and mass adaptations

    Ahtiainen et al. (2005). Short vs. Long Rest Period Between the Sets in Hypertrophic Resistance Training: Influence on Muscle Strength, Size, and Hormonal Adaptations in Trained Men. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/15604.1

    Cohort study

Nutrition

Self-monitoring

Barcode, label scan, search and photo keep logging short. Every logged day makes the expenditure estimate more precise.

Feeds into:Smart tracking

  1. Digital self-monitoring supported weight loss in adults with overweight

    Berry, Kassavou & Sutton (2021). Does self‐monitoring diet and physical activity behaviors using digital technology support adults with obesity or overweight to lose weight? A systematic literature review with meta‐analysis. Obes Rev. doi:10.1111/obr.13306

    Meta-analysis
  2. Regular self-weighing went with more weight loss, no psychological harm

    Zheng et al. (2015). Self-weighing in weight management: A systematic literature review. Obesity (Silver Spring). doi:10.1002/oby.20946

    Systematic review
  3. Self-monitoring linked to weight loss, with methodologically limited evidence

    Burke, Wang & Sevick (2011). Self-Monitoring in Weight Loss: A Systematic Review of the Literature. J Am Diet Assoc. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2010.10.008

    Systematic review
  4. Self-monitoring combined with other techniques worked better

    Michie et al. (2009). Effective techniques in healthy eating and physical activity interventions: A meta-regression.. Health Psychol. doi:10.1037/a0016136

    Meta-analysis
  5. Frequent self-weighing predicted moderate loss and less regain

    VanWormer et al. (2008). The Impact of Regular Self-weighing on Weight Management: A Systematic Literature Review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-5-54

    Systematic review
  6. More frequent electronic logging went with greater weight loss

    Harvey et al. (2019). Log Often, Lose More: Electronic Dietary Self‐Monitoring for Weight Loss. Obesity (Silver Spring). doi:10.1002/oby.22382

    Cohort study
  7. Weighing, steps and regular food logging predicted weight loss

    Painter et al. (2017). What Matters in Weight Loss? An In-Depth Analysis of Self-Monitoring. J Med Internet Res. doi:10.2196/jmir.7457

    Cohort study
  8. Daily weighing gave more weight loss than weighing on most days

    Steinberg et al. (2015). Weighing Every Day Matters: Daily Weighing Improves Weight Loss and Adoption of Weight Control Behaviors. J Acad Nutr Diet. doi:10.1016/j.jand.2014.12.011

    Randomised trial
  9. Frequent, consistent dietary logging improved long-term success

    Peterson et al. (2014). Dietary self‐monitoring and long‐term success with weight management. Obesity (Silver Spring). doi:10.1002/oby.20807

    Cohort study
  10. Consistent early online self-monitoring went with greater weight loss

    Krukowski et al. (2013). Patterns of success: Online self-monitoring in a web-based behavioral weight control program.. Health Psychol. doi:10.1037/a0028135

    Randomised trial
  11. Diet records and activity explained most of the weight-loss variation

    Hollis et al. (2008). Weight Loss During the Intensive Intervention Phase of the Weight-Loss Maintenance Trial. Am J Prev Med. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2008.04.013

    Randomised trial

Protein

Your protein target is 2.2 g per kilo of body weight while dieting and 2.0 g at maintenance and while gaining.

Feeds into:Nutrition plan

  1. More protein gave small extra lean-mass gains in resistance training

    Nunes et al. (2022). Systematic review and meta‐analysis of protein intake to support muscle mass and function in healthy adults. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. doi:10.1002/jcsm.12922

    Meta-analysis
  2. Slightly more protein (+0.1 g/kg/day) may maintain or add lean mass

    Tagawa et al. (2021). Dose–response relationship between protein intake and muscle mass increase: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutr Rev. doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuaa104

    Meta-analysis
  3. Protein above the RDA helped lean mass during energy restriction

    Hudson et al. (2020). Protein Intake Greater than the RDA Differentially Influences Whole-Body Lean Mass Responses to Purposeful Catabolic and Anabolic Stressors: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Adv Nutr. doi:10.1093/advances/nmz106

    Meta-analysis
  4. Protein boosted strength and muscle, no extra gain beyond about 1.6 g/kg

    Morton et al. (2018). A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein supplementation on resistance training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength in healthy adults. Br J Sports Med. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2017-097608

    Meta-analysis
  5. ISSN: 1.4-2.0 g/kg/day protein is sufficient for most exercisers

    Jäger et al. (2017). International Society of Sports Nutrition Position Stand: protein and exercise. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. doi:10.1186/s12970-017-0177-8

    Position stand
  6. Joint position stand on nutrition and athletic performance

    Thomas, Erdman & Burke (2016). Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Dietitians of Canada, and the American College of Sports Medicine: Nutrition and Athletic Performance. J Acad Nutr Diet. doi:10.1016/j.jand.2015.12.006

    Position stand
  7. ESPEN: older people should eat at least 1.0-1.2 g/kg/day protein

    Deutz et al. (2014). Protein intake and exercise for optimal muscle function with aging: Recommendations from the ESPEN Expert Group. Clin Nutr. doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2014.04.007

    Position stand
  8. PROT-AGE: active older adults need at least 1.2 g/kg/day protein

    Bauer et al. (2013). Evidence-Based Recommendations for Optimal Dietary Protein Intake in Older People: A Position Paper From the PROT-AGE Study Group. J Am Med Dir Assoc. doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2013.05.021

    Position stand
  9. Protein supplements raised muscle and strength gains, young and old

    Cermak et al. (2012). Protein supplementation augments the adaptive response of skeletal muscle to resistance-type exercise training: a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.3945/ajcn.112.037556

    Meta-analysis
  10. Target about 0.4 g/kg protein per meal across four or more meals

    Schoenfeld & Aragon (2018). How much protein can the body use in a single meal for muscle-building? Implications for daily protein distribution. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. doi:10.1186/s12970-018-0215-1

    Review
  11. In a deficit, 2.4 g/kg protein beat 1.2 g/kg for lean mass

    Longland et al. (2016). Higher compared with lower dietary protein during an energy deficit combined with intense exercise promotes greater lean mass gain and fat mass loss: a randomized trial. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.3945/ajcn.115.119339

    Randomised trial
  12. Older men needed relatively more protein per meal than younger men

    Moore et al. (2015). Protein Ingestion to Stimulate Myofibrillar Protein Synthesis Requires Greater Relative Protein Intakes in Healthy Older Versus Younger Men. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. doi:10.1093/gerona/glu103

    Cohort study

Resting and total energy expenditure

The starting value comes from the Mifflin-St Jeor equation times an activity factor.

Feeds into:Automatic calorie needsNutrition plan

  1. Third update of MET values for human physical activities

    Herrmann et al. (2024). 2024 Adult Compendium of Physical Activities: A third update of the energy costs of human activities. J Sport Health Sci. doi:10.1016/j.jshs.2023.10.010

    Systematic review
  2. Mifflin recommended in obesity; no evidence for total-expenditure equations

    Madden, Mulrooney & Shah (2016). Estimation of energy expenditure using prediction equations in overweight and obese adults: a systematic review. J Hum Nutr Diet. doi:10.1111/jhn.12355

    Systematic review
  3. Mifflin-St Jeor most often landed within 10% of measured RMR

    Frankenfield, Roth-Yousey & Compher (2005). Comparison of Predictive Equations for Resting Metabolic Rate in Healthy Nonobese and Obese Adults: A Systematic Review. J Am Diet Assoc. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2005.02.005

    Systematic review
  4. RMR equations mostly underestimated measured RMR in athletes

    Jagim et al. (2018). Accuracy of Resting Metabolic Rate Prediction Equations in Athletes. J Strength Cond Res. doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002111

    Method
  5. Cunningham equation predicted resting energy well in recreational athletes

    ten Haaf & Weijs (2014). Resting Energy Expenditure Prediction in Recreational Athletes of 18–35 Years: Confirmation of Cunningham Equation and an Improved Weight-Based Alternative. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0108460

    Method
  6. Updated MET values for the energy cost of activities

    Ainsworth et al. (2011). 2011 Compendium of Physical Activities. Med Sci Sports Exerc. doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e31821ece12

    Method
  7. Mifflin estimated REE best in US adults with BMI 25 to 40

    Weijs (2008). Validity of predictive equations for resting energy expenditure in US and Dutch overweight and obese class I and II adults aged 18–65 y. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.1093/ajcn/88.4.959

    Method
  8. Resting energy equation from weight, height, age and sex

    Mifflin et al. (1990). A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.1093/ajcn/51.2.241

    Method
  9. Lean body mass was the single best predictor of BMR

    Cunningham (1980). A reanalysis of the factors influencing basal metabolic rate in normal adults. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.1093/ajcn/33.11.2372

    Method
  10. Classic basal metabolism equations from weight, height and age

    Harris & Benedict (1918). A Biometric Study of Human Basal Metabolism. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. doi:10.1073/pnas.4.12.370

    Method

Energy balance and adaptation

Ownit compares what you eat with what the scale shows over the weeks and keeps re-learning your expenditure from that. If it changes during a diet, your target follows.

Feeds into:Automatic calorie needs

  1. Metabolic adaptation persisted six years after the weight-loss competition

    Fothergill et al. (2016). Persistent metabolic adaptation 6 years after “The Biggest Loser” competition. Obesity (Silver Spring). doi:10.1002/oby.21538

    Cohort study
  2. Early adaptation was linked to insulin secretion and fluid balance

    Müller et al. (2015). Metabolic adaptation to caloric restriction and subsequent refeeding: the Minnesota Starvation Experiment revisited. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.3945/ajcn.115.109173

    Randomised trial
  3. Metabolic adaptation to weight loss: implications for athletes

    Trexler, Smith-Ryan & Norton (2014). Metabolic adaptation to weight loss: implications for the athlete. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. doi:10.1186/1550-2783-11-7

    Review
  4. Dynamic models predict weight loss better than the 3500-kcal rule

    Thomas et al. (2013). Can a weight loss of one pound a week be achieved with a 3500-kcal deficit? Commentary on a commonly accepted rule. Int J Obes (Lond). doi:10.1038/ijo.2013.51

    Review
  5. Overview of energy balance and body weight regulation

    Hall et al. (2012). Energy balance and its components: implications for body weight regulation. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.3945/ajcn.112.036350

    Review
  6. Adaptive thermogenesis: more a concept than a measurable entity

    Dulloo et al. (2012). Adaptive thermogenesis in human body weight regulation: more of a concept than a measurable entity?. Obes Rev. doi:10.1111/j.1467-789x.2012.01041.x

    Review
  7. Dynamic model links energy imbalance to body weight change

    Hall et al. (2011). Quantification of the effect of energy imbalance on bodyweight. Lancet. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(11)60812-x

    Method
  8. Model predicts metabolic adaptation and weight change on diets

    Hall (2010). Predicting metabolic adaptation, body weight change, and energy intake in humans. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00559.2009

    Method
  9. The body actively opposes a reduced weight over the long term

    Rosenbaum & Leibel (2010). Adaptive thermogenesis in humans. Int J Obes (Lond). doi:10.1038/ijo.2010.184

    Review
  10. Energy needed per unit of weight lost depends on body fat

    Hall (2008). What is the required energy deficit per unit weight loss?. Int J Obes (Lond). doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803720

    Method
  11. NEAT differences explained large variation in fat gain when overeating

    Levine, Eberhardt & Jensen (1999). Role of Nonexercise Activity Thermogenesis in Resistance to Fat Gain in Humans. Science. doi:10.1126/science.283.5399.212

    Cohort study
  12. Origin of the roughly 3,500 kcal per pound rule

    Wishnofsky (1958). Caloric Equivalents of Gained or Lost Weight. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.1093/ajcn/6.5.542

    Method

Weight trend and noise

A Kalman filter separates your weight from the daily ups and downs of water and food and drops gross outliers.

Feeds into:Automatic calorie needsEverything at a glance

  1. Weekly, seasonal and holiday body weight fluctuation patterns

    Turicchi et al. (2020). Weekly, seasonal and holiday body weight fluctuation patterns among individuals engaged in a European multi-centre behavioural weight loss maintenance intervention. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232152

    Randomised trial
  2. Muscle glycogen is stored with at least three times its weight in water

    Fernández-Elías et al. (2015). Relationship between muscle water and glycogen recovery after prolonged exercise in the heat in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol. doi:10.1007/s00421-015-3175-z

    Randomised trial
  3. Weight rises on weekends and falls during weekdays

    Orsama et al. (2014). Weight Rhythms: Weight Increases during Weekends and Decreases during Weekdays. Obes Facts. doi:10.1159/000356147

    Cohort study
  4. Frequent weight measurements allow estimating changes in energy intake

    Hall & Chow (2011). Estimating changes in free-living energy intake and its confidence interval. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.3945/ajcn.111.014399

    Method
  5. Mathematical model of how body weight changes over time

    Chow & Hall (2008). The Dynamics of Human Body Weight Change. PLoS Comput Biol. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000045

    Method
  6. Weight maintenance defined as change under 3% of body weight

    Stevens et al. (2006). The definition of weight maintenance. Int J Obes (Lond). doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803175

    Review
  7. Daily body mass varied by under 1% in active men

    Cheuvront et al. (2004). Daily Body Mass Variability and Stability in Active Men Undergoing Exercise-Heat Stress. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. doi:10.1123/ijsnem.14.5.532

    Cohort study
  8. Glycogen-bound water distorts weight changes while dieting

    Kreitzman, Coxon & Szaz (1992). Glycogen storage: illusions of easy weight loss, excessive weight regain, and distortions in estimates of body composition. Am J Clin Nutr. doi:10.1093/ajcn/56.1.292s

    Review
  9. Recursive filter that estimates signals from noisy measurements

    Kalman (1960). A New Approach to Linear Filtering and Prediction Problems. J Basic Eng. doi:10.1115/1.3662552

    Method

Rate of loss and muscle retention

How fast you lose depends on your body fat, between 0.25 and 1 percent of body weight per week. The starting target stays at 75 percent of your expenditure or more.

Feeds into:Nutrition planAutomatic calorie needs

  1. Energy deficit blunted lean-mass gains but not strength gains

    Murphy & Koehler (2022). Energy deficiency impairs resistance training gains in lean mass but not strength: A meta‐analysis and meta‐regression. Scand J Med Sci Sports. doi:10.1111/sms.14075

    Meta-analysis
  2. ACSM consensus on weight loss in weight-category sports

    Burke et al. (2021). ACSM Expert Consensus Statement on Weight Loss in Weight-Category Sports. Curr Sports Med Rep. doi:10.1249/jsr.0000000000000831

    Position stand
  3. Calorie restriction, exercise and rate of loss influence lean mass lost

    Chaston, Dixon & O'Brien (2007). Changes in fat-free mass during significant weight loss: a systematic review. Int J Obes (Lond). doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803483

    Systematic review
  4. Trained individuals can build muscle and lose fat at the same time

    Barakat et al. (2020). Body Recomposition: Can Trained Individuals Build Muscle and Lose Fat at the Same Time?. Strength Cond J. doi:10.1519/ssc.0000000000000584

    Review
  5. Protein recommendations for weight loss in athletes

    Hector & Phillips (2018). Protein Recommendations for Weight Loss in Elite Athletes: A Focus on Body Composition and Performance. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. doi:10.1123/ijsnem.2017-0273

    Review
  6. Contest diet: lose 0.5-1% body weight weekly to retain muscle

    Helms, Aragon & Fitschen (2014). Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding contest preparation: nutrition and supplementation. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. doi:10.1186/1550-2783-11-20

    Review
  7. Critical review of the 'one-quarter fat-free mass' weight-loss rule

    Heymsfield et al. (2014). Weight loss composition is one‐fourth fat‐free mass: a critical review and critique of this widely cited rule. Obes Rev. doi:10.1111/obr.12143

    Review
  8. Resistance exercise plus protein restored muscle protein synthesis in deficit

    Areta et al. (2014). Reduced resting skeletal muscle protein synthesis is rescued by resistance exercise and protein ingestion following short-term energy deficit. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. doi:10.1152/ajpendo.00590.2013

    Cohort study
  9. 0.7%/week loss increased lean mass; 1.4%/week did not

    Garthe et al. (2011). Effect of Two Different Weight-Loss Rates on Body Composition and Strength and Power-Related Performance in Elite Athletes. Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. doi:10.1123/ijsnem.21.2.97

    Randomised trial
  10. In a deficit, 2.3 g/kg protein kept more lean mass than 1.0 g/kg

    Mettler, Mitchell & Tipton (2010). Increased Protein Intake Reduces Lean Body Mass Loss during Weight Loss in Athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc. doi:10.1249/mss.0b013e3181b2ef8e

    Randomised trial
  11. Equation estimating how much of weight lost is fat-free mass

    Hall (2007). Body fat and fat-free mass inter-relationships: Forbes's theory revisited. Br J Nutr. doi:10.1017/s0007114507691946

    Method

Building muscle in a surplus

When gaining, Ownit plans 0.1 to 1.5 percent weight gain per month depending on training experience. Beginners may gain faster than advanced lifters.

Feeds into:Nutrition plan

  1. Nutrition recommendations for physique athletes across all phases

    Roberts et al. (2020). Nutritional Recommendations for Physique Athletes. J Hum Kinet. doi:10.2478/hukin-2019-0096

    Review
  2. Macronutrient and supplement guidance for the bodybuilding off-season

    Iraki et al. (2019). Nutrition Recommendations for Bodybuilders in the Off-Season: A Narrative Review. Sports (Basel). doi:10.3390/sports7070154

    Review
  3. Is an energy surplus needed for hypertrophy? Evidence and gaps

    Slater et al. (2019). Is an Energy Surplus Required to Maximize Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy Associated With Resistance Training. Front Nutr. doi:10.3389/fnut.2019.00131

    Review
  4. Protein overfeeding may affect body composition differently than carbs or fat

    Leaf & Antonio (2017). The Effects of Overfeeding on Body Composition: The Role of Macronutrient Composition - A Narrative Review. Int J Exerc Sci. doi:10.70252/hppf5281

    Review
  5. When overeating, calories set fat gain while protein affected lean mass

    Bray et al. (2012). Effect of Dietary Protein Content on Weight Gain, Energy Expenditure, and Body Composition During Overeating. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2011.1918

    Randomised trial
  6. Nutritional counselling gave athletes greater long-term lean-mass gains

    Garthe, Raastad & Sundgot-Borgen (2011). Long-term effect of nutritional counselling on desired gain in body mass and lean body mass in elite athletes. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. doi:10.1139/h11-051

    Randomised trial
  7. Bodybuilding off-season diet slightly hyperenergetic, about 15% more energy

    Lambert, Frank & Evans (2004). Macronutrient Considerations for the Sport of Bodybuilding. Sports Med. doi:10.2165/00007256-200434050-00004

    Review
  8. High-calorie supplements raised body and fat-free mass with training

    Rozenek et al. (2002). Effects of high-calorie supplements on body composition and muscular strength following resistance training. J Sports Med Phys Fitness. PubMed 12094125

    Randomised trial

How this list is made

A work is listed when it belongs to a rule in Ownit. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews and position stands come first, because they pool many single studies. We looked up every source via DOI, PubMed or the publisher. None of the studies tested Ownit itself. Ownit's rules follow their findings, and concrete limits such as the 5 percent cap on weight increases are product decisions made on that basis.

FAQ

Questions about the science behind Ownit

Has Ownit itself been tested in a study?

No. The studies on this page look at training and nutrition, not at the app. Ownit's rules for planning, progression and calorie needs follow their findings.

Why are most entries meta-analyses?

A meta-analysis pools many single studies, so it depends less on the chance result of one study. Where a method goes back to an original paper, such as the Mifflin-St Jeor equation or the Kalman filter, the original paper is on the list.

What does backed by science mean for Ownit?

Every rule Ownit applies belongs to a research field on this page, for example the RIR target to the research on proximity to failure or the protein target to the meta-analyses on protein and resistance training. The exact numbers in the app are product decisions within what that research suggests.

How current is the list?

It was last updated on 7 October 2026. We add new work when it concerns a rule in Ownit.

Training and nutrition by the evidence

Ownit is free on iOS and Android.

Backed by science: the research behind Ownit