ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2025
The influence of high-load and combined high- and low-load resistance training on electromyographic behavior during an absolute muscular endurance task.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the effects of 6 weeks of combined high- and low-load lower body resistance training (H + L) to high-load only training (H) on maximal strength, muscle thickness (MT), and electromyographic (EMG
methodsTwenty-eight untrained males performed maximal voluntary contractions (MVCs) and trapezoidal muscle actions to failure at the same absolute 50% MVC for the knee extensors before (PRE) and after training (POST
resultsAfter training: maximal strength increased similarly between the groups (p < 0.001). MT increased for both groups (p < 0.001-0.01), but was greater for H + L (p < 0.022). Only H + L improved AME (p < 0.001). The b-terms decreased, whereas the a-terms increased for both groups during the FMA LD and LMA LI (p < 0.001-0.030). N-EMG
conclusionDespite similar increases in strength, only H + L improved AME, exhibited greater hypertrophy, and required less muscle excitation at steady torque. The changes in b- and a-terms suggest reduced muscle excitation was necessary to match torque during the upper regions of FMA LD and LMA LI. Therefore, H + L training may improve strength and endurance, and reduce neural cost during sustained activities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40553125What 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.