Julieta Lara-De la Fuente

Initial Physical Education teacher education has been debated in relation to biomedical and health-oriented rationalities; however, credit distribution alone cannot capture biologisation as an epistemological, discursive, and pedagogical phenomenon. This study conducted a documentary curriculum mapping of 28 Chilean university programmes in force up to January 2026, distributed across public (n = 12), private (n = 9), and G9 universities (n = 7). Courses were classified into Biology, Basic Medicine, and Health Sciences using the OECD Fields of Research and Development taxonomy, and their relative credit weight was calculated. Group comparisons used one-way ANOVA or Kruskal–Wallis tests according to statistical assumptions. Overall, the analysed areas represented 12.25% of programme credits: Biology, 0.70%; Basic Medicine, 4.22%; and Health Sciences, 7.28%. The total proportion differed across university groups, F(2,25) = 4.56, p = 0.0205, η² = 0.267; Tukey’s HSD showed higher values in G9 than private universities (difference = 5.61 percentage points; 95% CI 0.92–10.30; p = 0.0168). Health Sciences also differed, H(2) = 6.84, p = 0.0327, ε² = 0.194, with higher mean ranks in G9 than private universities (Dunn–Holm p = 0.0270), although Welch’s ANOVA did not confirm the overall result (p = 0.0943). No differences were observed in Biology or Basic Medicine. These findings describe explicit credit allocation but do not establish cross-curricular biomedical orientation or hierarchical differences among university types.

Background and Objectives: Hypertension is an important clinical condition associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Resistance training has been proposed as a non-pharmacological strategy for blood pressure control; however, its clinical relevance in hypertensive adults remains unclear because of methodological heterogeneity and differences in training prescription. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyse the effects of resistance training on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in adults with hypertension or elevated blood pressure, with emphasis on the magnitude of the effects and a cautious interpretation of their clinical relevance. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted in Scopus, PubMed, EBSCOhost and Web of Science from database inception to 1 June 2026. Randomised controlled trials were eligible if they included adults with hypertension or elevated blood pressure, examined resistance training interventions, and reported SBP and DBP values before and after the intervention. Twelve randomised controlled trials were included. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using inverse-variance random-effects models. Results: Resistance training produced a significant reduction in SBP compared with control or comparator groups, with a moderate pooled effect (SMD = −0.77; 95% CI: −1.06 to −0.48; p < 0.00001; I² = 35%). DBP also decreased significantly, with a smaller pooled effect (SMD = −0.43; 95% CI: −0.67 to −0.19; p = 0.0003; I² = 0%). Conclusions: Resistance training reduces SBP and DBP in adults with hypertension or elevated blood pressure. Its clinical application should be considered complementary to pharmacological treatment. Because individual participant data and categorical transition analyses were not available, the current evidence does not confirm systematic reclassification across AHA/ACC blood pressure categories. Standardised protocols and analyses based on absolute blood pressure changes in mmHg are required.