ArticleSports medicine - open2023
Exploring the Low Force-High Velocity Domain of the Force-Velocity Relationship in Acyclic Lower-Limb Extensions.
Article in Sports medicine - open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Rate of Torque Development as a Determinant of the Torque-Velocity Relationship.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2025Article
- A Muscle Physiology-Based Framework for Quantifying Training Load in Resistance Exercises.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Impact of a 20-Week Resistance Training Program on the Force-Velocity Profile in Novice Lifters Using Isokinetic Two-Point Testing.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
- Article
- Authors' Reply to Julian Alcazar et al.: "Exploring the Low Force-High Velocity Domain of the Force-Velocity Relationship in Acyclic Lower-Limb Extensions".Sports medicine - open · 2023Article
- Comment on: Exploring the Low Force-High Velocity Domain of the Force-Velocity Relationship in Acyclic Lower-Limb Extensions.Sports medicine - open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare linear and curvilinear models describing the force-velocity relationship obtained in lower-limb acyclic extensions, considering experimental data on an unprecedented range of velocity conditions.
methodsNine athletes performed lower-limb extensions on a leg-press ergometer, designed to provide a very broad range of force and velocity conditions. Previously inaccessible low inertial and resistive conditions were achieved by performing extensions horizontally and with assistance. Force and velocity were continuously measured over the push-off in six resistive conditions to assess individual force-velocity relationships. Goodness of fit of linear and curvilinear models (second-order polynomial function, Fenn and Marsh's, and Hill's equations) on force and velocity data were compared via the Akaike Information Criterion.
resultsExpressed relative to the theoretical maximal force and velocity obtained from the linear model, force and velocity data ranged from 26.6 ± 6.6 to 96.0 ± 3.6% (16-99%) and from 8.3 ± 1.9 to 76.6 ± 7.0% (5-86%), respectively. Curvilinear and linear models showed very high fit (adjusted r
conclusionA combination between goodness of fit, degrees of freedom and common sense (e.g., rational physiologically values) indicated linear modelling is preferable for describing the force-velocity relationship during acyclic lower-limb extensions, compared to curvilinear models. Notably, linearity appears maintained in conditions approaching theoretical maximal velocity. Using horizontal and assisted lower-limb extension to more broadly explore resistive/assistive conditions could improve reliability and accuracy of the force-velocity relationship and associated parameters.
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.