SynthesisEuropean journal of sport science2026
Mental Fatigue and Resistance Exercise: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Including GRADE Qualification.
Synthesis in European journal of sport science, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent increase in randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of mental fatigue (MF) on RE warrants an update of the available meta-analytical evidence. This study presents the results of a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis, including GRADE qualification, examining the effects of MF on RE across different subgroups. We included only randomized controlled trials involving healthy human participants, a high-demand cognitive task requiring cognitive effort (e.g., Stroop test), a low-demand or passive control condition (e.g., watching documentaries), and a resistance exercise performance task assessing volume. A total of 11 studies reported 14 comparisons involving more than 205 participants, providing moderate-level evidence. The random-effects meta-analysis revealed a significant mean negative effect of cognitive effort on RE volume (g = -0.39 and p < 0.01). Subgroup analyses suggested that multijoint exercises may be more susceptible to impairment (g = -0.45 and p < 0.01) than single-joint exercises (g = -0.20 and p = 0.09). The magnitude of impairment appeared larger at moderate-intensity loads (60%-79% 1RM and g = -0.56) relative to low-intensity (g = -0.40) and bodyweight conditions (g = -0.25). Similarly, the effect appeared greater in high training volume conditions (g = -0.54) compared to moderate volume (g = -0.37). Overall, although this review confirms the negative impact of MF on RE volume, the findings should be interpreted with caution due to low-quality evidence.
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.