Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36318384›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2023

Pharmacological Blockade of Muscle Afferents and Perception of Effort: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.

Maxime Bergevin, James Steele, Marie Payen de la Garanderie, Camille Feral-Basin, Samuele M Marcora, Pierre Rainville, Jeffrey G Caron, Benjamin Pageaux

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

8 authors.

Maxime BergevinÉcole de kinésiologie et des sciences de l'activite physique (EKSAP), Faculté de médecine, Université́ de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0343-8900
James SteeleSchool of Sport, Health and Social Sciences, Southampton, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8003-0757
Marie Payen de la GaranderieÉcole de kinésiologie et des sciences de l'activite physique (EKSAP), Faculté de médecine, Université́ de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Camille Feral-BasinÉcole de kinésiologie et des sciences de l'activite physique (EKSAP), Faculté de médecine, Université́ de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0045-8268
Samuele M MarcoraDepartment of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences (DiBiNeM), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1570-7936
Pierre RainvilleCentre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal (CRIUGM), Montreal, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9801-757X
Jeffrey G CaronÉcole de kinésiologie et des sciences de l'activite physique (EKSAP), Faculté de médecine, Université́ de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4972-2704
Benjamin PageauxÉcole de kinésiologie et des sciences de l'activite physique (EKSAP), Faculté de médecine, Université́ de Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada. benjamin.pageaux@umontreal.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-9302-5183

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe perception of effort provides information on task difficulty and influences physical exercise regulation and human behavior. This perception differs from other-exercise related perceptions such as pain. There is no consensus on the role of group III/IV muscle afferents as a signal processed by the brain to generate the perception of effort.

objectiveThe aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of pharmacologically blocking muscle afferents on the perception of effort.

methodsSix databases were searched to identify studies measuring the ratings of perceived effort during physical exercise, with and without pharmacological blockade of muscle afferents. Articles were coded based on the operational measurement used to distinguish studies in which perception of effort was assessed specifically (effort dissociated) or as a composite experience including other exercise-related perceptions (effort not dissociated). Articles that did not provide enough information for coding were assigned to the unclear group.

resultsThe effort dissociated group (n = 6) demonstrated a slight increase in ratings of perceived effort with reduced muscle afferent feedback (standard mean change raw, 0.39; 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.64). The group effort not dissociated (n = 2) did not reveal conclusive results (standard mean change raw, - 0.29; 95% confidence interval - 2.39 to 1.8). The group unclear (n = 8) revealed a slight ratings of perceived effort decrease with reduced muscle afferent feedback (standard mean change raw, - 0.27; 95% confidence interval - 0.50 to - 0.04).

conclusionsThe heterogeneity in results between groups reveals that the inclusion of perceptions other than effort in its rating influences the ratings of perceived effort reported by the participants. The absence of decreased ratings of perceived effort in the effort dissociated group suggests that muscle afferent feedback is not a sensory signal for the perception of effort.

Indexed as

Muscle ContractionMuscle, SkeletalExerciseHumansPerceptionQuadriceps Muscle

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.