ArticlePeerJ2025
Sex differences in anaerobic performance in CrossFit® athletes: a comparison of three different all-out tests.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. 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.
- Ginger Supplementation Improves Performance and Attenuates Perceived Exertion and Neuromuscular Fatigue in CrossFitJournal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
- Observational
- Integrative Physiological Strategies for Monitoring Demands in Functional Fitness.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- High Intensity Functional Training in Hybrid Competitions: A Scoping Review of Performance Models and Physiological Adaptations.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Athletic performance can be influenced by various factors, including those related to biological sex. Various scientific disciplines have studied the observed differences in athletic performance between men and women. Moreover, anaerobic performance refers to the capacity of the human body to generate energy quickly and efficiently during high-intensity and short-duration activities. It is associated with the ability to perform explosive actions and the capacity for rapid recovery between repeated efforts. Anaerobic performance is a determining factor for performance in high-intensity sports and those with predominantly lower intensity but intermittent peaks of higher intensity. One high-intensity sport that has experienced exponential growth and attracts increasing numbers of participants yearly is commercially known as CrossFit® (CF). Therefore, the primary purpose of this study was to determine the anaerobic performance differences between sexes in CF athletes in terms of absolute and relative values. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted over 2 weeks. Fifty CrossFit® athletes (25 men and 25 women) voluntarily participated in the study. They were subjected to body composition analysis and three maximal effort tests to measure anaerobic performance: a cycle ergometer test, a continuous jump test and a squat test. Results: Significant differences were found in all the variables of absolute peak power and relative to body mass in the three tests. In values adjusted to lean and muscle mass, significant differences were only found in the cycle ergometer test but not in the other two. In mean power variables, significant differences were found in all the variables studied, except for the mean power adjusted to muscle mass in the squat test. In conclusion, this study's results indicate that differences between sexes in absolute and relative peak powers measured in all tests evaluated are explained by the amount of lean and muscle mass. However, mean powers show significant differences in all variables except for the one related to muscle mass in the squat test.
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.