ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
The effect of two types of pyramidal and reverse pyramidal loading on spine and pelvis coordination variability during deadlift.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the effects of pyramidal and reverse pyramidal loading on spine and pelvis coordination patterns and their variability during deadlift.
methodsTwelve trained male powerlifters performed deadlifts under two loading protocols: pyramidal (50%, 70%, 90% of 10RM) and reverse pyramidal (same loads in descending order). Segmental coordination (PL-LB, LB-LT, LT-UT) was analyzed using 3D motion capture and a modified vector coding method across concentric and eccentric phases. Coordination pattern frequencies and variability were statistically assessed using repeated-measures ANOVA and Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM).
resultsIn-phase coordination patterns were dominant in the PL-LB and LB-LT couplings across all intensities. However, pyramidal loading led to increased distal dominance and reduced proximal contribution, particularly at 90% intensity. Significant differences in coordination patterns were observed between the two loading strategies, while coordination variability did not differ significantly.
conclusionPyramidal loading imposes greater neuromechanical demands on trunk segments, increasing the risk of coordination breakdown and potential injury in distal spinal regions. Reverse pyramidal loading may offer a safer alternative for high-load resistance training. Further research is warranted under maximal or fatigue-inducing conditions.
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.