Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35751668›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of applied physiology2022

Resistance exercise training and the motor unit.

Trent J Herda

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of applied physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

1 author.

Trent J HerdaNeuromechanics Laboratory, Department of Health, Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, 1301 Sunnyside Avenue, Room 101BE, Lawrence, KS, 66045, USA. t.herda@ku.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5555-5156

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Resistance exercise training (RET) is a key modality to enhance sports performance, injury prevention and rehabilitation, and improving overall health via increases in muscular strength. Yet, the contribution of neural mechanisms to increases in muscular strength are highly debated. This is particularly true for the involvement of the motor unit, which is the link between neural (activation) and mechanical (muscle fiber twitch forces) mechanisms. A plethora of literature that examines the effects of RET on skeletal muscle speculate the role of motor units, such as increases in firing rates partially explains muscular strength gains. Results, however, are mixed regarding changes in firing rates in studies that utilize single motor unit recordings. The lack of clarity could be related to vast or subtle differences in RET programs, methods to record motor units, muscles tested, types of contractions and intensities used to record motor units, etc. Yet to be discussed, mixed findings could be the result of non-uniform MU behavior that is not typically accounted for in RET research. The purpose of this narration is to discuss the effects of acute resistance exercise training studies on MU behavior and to provide guidance for future research.

Indexed as

Resistance TrainingAthletic PerformanceElectromyographyHumansMotor NeuronsMuscle ContractionMuscle, SkeletalWounds and InjuriesAction potential waveformsFiring ratesMotor unitNeural adaptationsResistance exercise training

Identifiers

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.