ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2018
Muscle fatigue in response to low-load blood flow-restricted elbow-flexion exercise: are there any sex differences?
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The immediate effects of blood flow restriction training on upper limb muscle strength and fatigue level: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- The Discrepancy Between External and Internal Load/Intensity during Blood Flow Restriction Exercise: Understanding Blood Flow Restriction Pressure as Modulating Factor.Sports medicine - open · 2024Article
- The effects of blood flow restriction training on post activation potentiation and upper limb muscle activation: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Review
- Sex differences in muscle fatigue following isokinetic muscle contractions.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine whether men and women display a different magnitude of muscle fatigue in response to high-load (HL) and low-load blood flow-restricted (LLBFR) elbow-flexion exercise. We also explored to which extent both exercise protocols induce similar levels of muscle fatigue (i.e., torque decrement).
methodsSixty-two young participants (31 men and 31 women) performed dynamic elbow flexions at 20 and 75% of one-repetition maximum for LLBFR and HL exercise, respectively. Maximum voluntary isometric contractions were performed before and after exercise to quantify muscle fatigue.
resultsMen and women exhibited similar magnitude of relative torque decrement after both exercise protocols (p > 0.05). HL was more fatiguing (∆ torque output: 11.9 and 23 N.m in women and men, respectively) than LLBFR resistance exercise (∆ torque output: 8.3 and 15.4 N.m in women and men, respectively) in both sexes, but this was largely attenuated after controlling for the differences in volume load between protocols (p > 0.05).
conclusionsThese data show that torque decrement in response to LLBFR and HL dynamic elbow-flexion exercise does not follow a sexually dimorphic pattern. Our data also indicate that, if performed in a multiple-set fashion and prescribed for a given volume load, elbow-flexion LLBFR exercise induces similar levels of fatigue as HL acute training. Importantly, this occurs similarly in both sexes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30006670What 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.