ArticlePloS one2024
Sex differences in intra-set kinematics and electromyography during different maximum repetition sets in the barbell back squat?
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Tongue Training Tasks on Intramuscular Activity Distribution: Evaluation Using Muscle Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Journal of oral rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Intra-Rater and Test-Retest Reliability of Kinovea for the Kinematic Analysis of Squatting in Healthy Active Women.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Acute Effect of the Bounce Squat on Ground Reaction Force at the Turning Point and Barbell Kinematics.Journal of strength and conditioning research · 2026Article
- Assessing Reliability in Flywheel Squat Performance: The Role of Sex and Inertial Load.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Barbell squats are commonly utilized in resistance training for rehabilitation, daily living enhancement, and improving sports performance. The current study investigated the kinematic and electromyographic (EMG) parameters in the squat between sexes across different repetition ranges (1-, 3-, 6-, and 10-RM) among recreationally strength-trained subjects. A total of 26 subjects (13 men: age 25 ± 3.5 years, height 178.2 ± 5.8 cm, weight 82.3 ± 9.1 kg; 13 women: age 24 ± 4.1 years, height 165.4 ± 6.3 cm, weight 68.2 ± 8.7 kg) participated in the study. The level of significance was set at p<0.05. The findings revealed no sex-specific differences in average barbell velocity across repetition ranges. However, the 1-RM showed a significantly lower average velocity compared to the final repetition of other repetition ranges (p<0.001), with the last repetition at 10-RM revealing a significantly higher velocity (p<0.001). Women had greater maximal angular hip extension velocity in the final repetitions of the 6- and 10-RM (p≤0.035, ηp2≤0.20), while both sexes displayed lower maximal angular knee extension velocity in the final repetition of the 10-RM (p = 0.028, ηp2 = 0.15). Moreover, men had lower EMG amplitude in the rectus femoris (3- and 10-RM), soleus, and lateral vastus (10-RM) compared to women (p≥0.011, ηp2≥0.26). It was concluded that 10-RM differed greatly in kinematics and EMG, suggesting different fatigue mechanisms compared to other repetition ranges with heavier loads. Furthermore, sex differences in EMG and angular hip extension velocity might imply sex-specific fatiguing mechanisms during high-repetition squats. These considerations could be important when prescribing training programs.
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.