Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15618333›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of sports medicine2005

Does oral contraceptive use affect maximum force production in women?

K J Elliott, N T Cable, T Reilly

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of sports medicine, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. The Effect of the Menstrual Cycle and Oral Contraceptive Cycle on Muscle Performance and Perceptual Measures.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

K J ElliottApplied Biomedical Sciences Research Group, GKT School of Biomedical Sciences, Shepherds House, Guys Campus, London SE1 1UL. kirsty.elliot@kcl.ac.uk [corrected]
N T Cable
T Reilly

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the effects of oral contraceptive use on maximum force production in young women.

methodsIn the study, 21 female subjects (14 pill users and seven eumenorrheic controls) took part. All pill using subjects had been taking a combined, monophasic oral contraceptive pill for at least 6 months. Maximum dynamic and isometric leg strength, maximum isometric strength of the first dorsal interosseus (FDI) muscle, and plasma concentrations of oestradiol and progesterone were measured on days 7 and 14 of pill consumption and day 5 of pill withdrawal. The eumenorrheic group was tested (FDI strength and hormone concentrations) on days 2 and 21 of the menstrual cycle.

resultsThere were no significant changes in the concentration of endogenous oestradiol or progesterone or any measure of muscle strength between pill phases (p<0.05). The pill group did not significantly differ from the eumenorrheic group (p<0.05), despite a significant increase in the concentration of progesterone and oestradiol on day 21 of the menstrual cycle compared with day 2 of the menstrual cycle and pill consumption and withdrawal (p<0.05).

conclusionsThese data suggest that oral contraceptive use does not significantly affect muscle strength. Moreover, oral contraceptive users were not stronger or weaker than their eumenorrheic counterparts.

Indexed as

AdultContraceptives, Oral, CombinedDown-RegulationEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayEstradiolFemaleFollicular PhaseHumansLuteal PhaseMenstrual CycleMuscle FatigueMuscle, SkeletalProgesteroneContraceptives, Oral, CombinedEstradiolProgesterone

Identifiers

PMID15618333
PMCPMC1725011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.