Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33355714›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of applied physiology2021

The knowns and unknowns of neural adaptations to resistance training.

Jakob Škarabot, Callum G Brownstein, Andrea Casolo, Alessandro Del Vecchio, Paul Ansdell

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of applied physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers, 17 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed, 17 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

98 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

38 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jakob ŠkarabotSchool of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK.
Callum G BrownsteinLaboratoire Interuniversitaire de Biologie de la Motricité, Université Jean Monnet Saint-Etienne, Université Lyon, Saint-Étienne, France.
Andrea CasoloDepartment of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alessandro Del VecchioDepartment of Artificial Intelligence and Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Friedrich-Alexander University, Erlangen-Nurnberg, 91052, Erlangen, Germany.
Paul AnsdellDepartment of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, UK. p.ansdell@northumbria.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7542-1107

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The initial increases in force production with resistance training are thought to be primarily underpinned by neural adaptations. This notion is firmly supported by evidence displaying motor unit adaptations following resistance training; however, the precise locus of neural adaptation remains elusive. The purpose of this review is to clarify and critically discuss the literature concerning the site(s) of putative neural adaptations to short-term resistance training. The proliferation of studies employing non-invasive stimulation techniques to investigate evoked responses have yielded variable results, but generally support the notion that resistance training alters intracortical inhibition. Nevertheless, methodological inconsistencies and the limitations of techniques, e.g. limited relation to behavioural outcomes and the inability to measure volitional muscle activity, preclude firm conclusions. Much of the literature has focused on the corticospinal tract; however, preliminary research in non-human primates suggests reticulospinal tract is a potential substrate for neural adaptations to resistance training, though human data is lacking due to methodological constraints. Recent advances in technology have provided substantial evidence of adaptations within a large motor unit population following resistance training. However, their activity represents the transformation of afferent and efferent inputs, making it challenging to establish the source of adaptation. Whilst much has been learned about the nature of neural adaptations to resistance training, the puzzle remains to be solved. Additional analyses of motoneuron firing during different training regimes or coupling with other methodologies (e.g., electroencephalography) may facilitate the estimation of the site(s) of neural adaptations to resistance training in the future.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalResistance TrainingEvoked Potentials, MotorHumansMotor NeuronsDescending tractsHigh-density surface electromyographyMotor cortexMotor neuronStrengthSynaptic inputTranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID33355714
PMCPMC7892509

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.