ArticleJournal of biomechanics2012
A three-compartment muscle fatigue model accurately predicts joint-specific maximum endurance times for sustained isometric tasks.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of subject-specific musculoskeletal model calibration strategies on muscle force and fatigue estimation.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- A four-compartment controller model of muscle fatigue for static and dynamic tasks.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Four-compartment muscle fatigue model to predict metabolic inhibition and long-lasting nonmetabolic components.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Article
- From Simulation to Reality: Predicting Torque With Fatigue Onset via Transfer Learning.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2024Article
- Applying a muscle fatigue model when optimizing load-sharing between muscles for short-duration high-intensity exercise: A preliminary study.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- Adapting a fatigue model for shoulder flexion fatigue: Enhancing recovery rate during intermittent rest intervals.Journal of biomechanics · 2020Article
- Selective Nerve Cuff Stimulation Strategies for Prolonging Muscle Output.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2020Article
- Exhaustion of Skeletal Muscle Fibers Within Seconds: Incorporating Phosphate Kinetics Into a Hill-Type Model.Frontiers in physiology · 2020Article
- Modification of a three-compartment muscle fatigue model to predict peak torque decline during intermittent tasks.Journal of biomechanics · 2018Article
- Mathematical Models of Localized Muscle Fatigue: Sensitivity Analysis and Assessment of Two Occupationally-Relevant Models.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The development of localized muscle fatigue has classically been described by the nonlinear intensity-endurance time (ET) curve (Rohmert, 1960; El Ahrache et al., 2006). These empirical intensity-ET relationships have been well-documented and vary between joint regions. We previously proposed a three-compartment biophysical fatigue model, consisting of compartments (i.e. states) for active (M(A)), fatigued (M(F)), and resting (M(R)) muscles, to predict the decay and recovery of muscle force (Xia and Frey Law, 2008). The purpose of this investigation was to determine optimal model parameter values, fatigue (F) and recovery (R), which define the "flow rate" between muscle states and to evaluate the model's accuracy for estimating expected intensity-ET curves. Using a grid-search approach with modified Monte Carlo simulations, over 1 million F and R permutations were used to predict the maximum ET for sustained isometric tasks at 9 intensities ranging from 10% to 90% of maximum in 10% increments (over 9 million simulations total). Optimal F and R values ranged from 0.00589 (F(ankle)) and 0.0182 (R(ankle)) to 0.00058 (F(shoulder)) and 0.00168 (R(shoulder)), reproducing the intensity-ET curves with low mean RMS errors: shoulder (2.7s), hand/grip (5.6s), knee (6.7s), trunk (9.3s), elbow (9.9s), and ankle (11.2s). Testing the model at different task intensities (15-95% maximum in 10% increments) produced slightly higher errors, but largely within the 95% prediction intervals expected for the intensity-ET curves. We conclude that this three-compartment fatigue model can be used to accurately represent joint-specific intensity-ET curves, which may be useful for ergonomic analyses and/or digital human modeling applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.