Electromyographic Comparison of Traditional Fitness Machines, Outdoor Fitness Equipment Without Load Selectors, and Outdoor Fitness Equipment with Load Selectors in a Seated Chest Press Exercise in Trained Young Men.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Improving spinal alignment through innovative resistance training with outdoor fitness equipment in middle-aged and older adults: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2025
   Trial
2. Electromyographic Comparison of Traditional Fitness Machines, Outdoor Fitness Equipment Without Load Selectors, and Outdoor Fitness Equipment with Load Selectors in a Seated Chest Press Exercise in Trained Young Men.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
   Article

Corrections and comments

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

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Funding

Abstract

Indexed as