Trial reportScientific reports2026
Acute muscle damage responses in elbow flexors following eccentric quasi-isometric exercise.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
This study aimed to compare acute muscle damage responses of the elbow flexors following eccentric quasi-isometric (EQI) and eccentric (ECC) exercise. Thirty healthy young men were randomly assigned to EQI or ECC (n = 15/group). Participants performed five sets of dumbbell elbow flexion to volitional failure. Maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVC), elbow joint range of motion (ROM), upper arm circumference (CIR), pressure pain threshold (PPT), plasma creatine kinase (CK), and myoglobin (Mb) were measured before, immediately after, and 1, 2, 3, and 7 days post-exercise. Time under tension (TUT) was recorded. TUT was approximately 3.5-fold longer in EQI than ECC. ECC induced greater reductions in MVC (- 30% vs. -15%) and ROM (- 27% vs. -13%), and larger increases in CIR (+ 5% vs. +2%). Peak CK (11,601 ± 9,483 vs. 135.2 ± 33.1 IU/L) and Mb (406.7 ± 271.8 vs. 17.7 ± 6.2 ng/mL) were markedly higher following ECC. Distal PPT was 13-19% lower in ECC. Most variables returned to baseline by day 7 in EQI. Despite longer TUT, EQI induced substantially less acute muscle damage and faster recovery than ECC when both were performed to volitional failure at the same relative external load.
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.