Lifting weights reduced depressive symptoms in 33 trials, and getting stronger was not what did it
33 randomised trials, 1,877 participants: resistance training reduced depressive symptoms with a moderate effect of 0.66, number needed to treat 4. Dose, health status and strength gains made no difference. Blinded trials found less.
Well-supported by good-quality research. how we score evidence
Caveat on this rating: Non-active controls only, so the comparison is against nothing rather than against another treatment; high heterogeneity; and the abstract itself reports that blinded trials found smaller effects, which means the pooled 0.66 is likely inflated by expectation. Mixed samples of healthy and ill participants, with symptom scores rather than diagnosis as the outcome.
Walking and running get most of the attention in exercise research. This is the pooled evidence for lifting.
Significant findings
Gordon, McDowell, Hallgren and colleagues pooled every randomised trial that assigned adults to resistance exercise training or a non active control and measured depressive symptoms with a validated scale. Fifty four effects came from 33 trials with 1,877 participants (947 trained, 930 controls).
"Resistance exercise training was associated with a significant reduction in depressive symptoms with a moderate-sized mean effect ∆ of 0.66 (95% CI, 0.48-0.83)." "The number needed to treat was 4": for every four people who trained, one had a meaningful improvement they would not otherwise have had.
The authors tested four things in advance that might change the result. Three did not: "Total volume of prescribed RET, participant health status, and strength improvements were not significantly associated with the antidepressant effect of RET." How much people lifted, whether they were healthy or ill, and whether they actually got stronger did not move the effect.
The other direction
The fourth did. "Smaller reductions in depressive symptoms were derived from randomized clinical trials with blinded allocation and/or assessment." Trials designed to stop expectation leaking into the result found less. Heterogeneity was high (I2 = 76.0%). The authors ask for "better-quality randomized clinical trials blinding both allocation and assessment and comparing RET with other empirically supported treatments."
What this does not show
Controls were non active, so this compares lifting with doing nothing, not with therapy, medication or other exercise. Many participants were not clinically depressed; the outcome is symptom scores. Take 0.66 as an upper bound.
Worth asking
Two or three sessions a week: what is the version of that I can start this week?
Source
Association of efficacy of resistance exercise training with depressive symptoms: meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of randomized clinical trials — Gordon BR, McDowell CP, Hallgren M, Meyer JD, Lyons M, Herring MP (2018)
Top-tier peer-reviewed journal
Read the source: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0572
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0572
How this was scored
- Study design
- Meta-analysis of randomised trials
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
- Published in
- Top-tier peer-reviewed journal
- Sample size
- 1,877
- Preregistered
- not recorded
- Conflicts disclosed
- not recorded
- Independent of proponent
- not recorded
- Retracted
- No
Read the full scoring rubric, including what it can't tell you.
Published September 24, 2026.
Questions
How strong is the evidence behind this?
veisund rates this source "strong evidence". Well-supported by good-quality research. It scores 71 out of 100 on our published rubric. One caveat travels with that badge: Non-active controls only, so the comparison is against nothing rather than against another treatment; high heterogeneity; and the abstract itself reports that blinded trials found smaller effects, which means the pooled 0.66 is likely inflated by expectation. Mixed samples of healthy and ill participants, with symptom scores rather than diagnosis as the outcome. The score is calculated from recorded facts about the source — study design, funding, publication venue, sample size, preregistration — not typed in by an editor.
What is the source for this?
Association of efficacy of resistance exercise training with depressive symptoms: meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis of randomized clinical trials — Gordon BR, McDowell CP, Hallgren M, Meyer JD, Lyons M, Herring MP (2018). Published in: Top-tier peer-reviewed journal. DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0572. The full source is linked on this page so you can read it yourself.
Who paid for this research, and does that matter?
Study design: Meta-analysis of randomised trials. Funding: Funding not disclosed. Independence from the proponent is not recorded. Industry sponsorship is one of the most reliably measured biases in medicine, which is why funding carries real weight in the score rather than sitting in a footnote.
Is this medical advice?
This is information to bring to your prescriber, not medical advice and not a reason to change anything on your own. Nothing here is an instruction to stop or reduce a medication. If you are in crisis, call or text 988.
This is information to bring to your prescriber, not medical advice and not a reason to change anything on your own. Nothing here is an instruction to stop or reduce a medication. If you are in crisis, call or text 988.