Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42412775›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2026

Acute effects of high load vs. low load combined with blood flow restriction on explosive performance and muscle-tendon unit mechanical properties.

Junjie Zhang

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Junjie ZhangSchool of Sports Science and Physical Education, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-8323-9724

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examined the acute effects of high-load resistance training and low-load resistance training with blood flow restriction on sprint ability, pennation angle and lower limb muscle stiffness. A randomized crossover trial was conducted in 17 collegiate male sprinters. Four intervention conditions were applied: high-load (90% 1RM hip thrust [HT] or half-squat [HS]) and low-load (30% 1RM HT or HS with blood flow restriction [BFR]) protocols. Muscle-tendon stiffness, pennation angle, and 20-m sprint performance were assessed at 5 minutes post-intervention. The results showed that statistically significant differences were observed among interventions (p < 0.05). Regarding sprint performance, the 30% HT + BFR significantly improved 0-20m sprint time, whereas the 30% HS + BFR significantly improved 10-20m sprint time compared to high-load conditions. In terms of muscle architecture, both 30% HS + BFR and 90% HS conditions elicited a significant decrease in the pennation angle of the rectus femoris. Moreover, muscle-tendon stiffness generally increased following conditioning activities; notably, the 30% HT + BFR condition increased rectus femoris stiffness, while the 30% HS + BFR condition significantly increased stiffness in the gastrocnemius and Achilles tendon compared to other interventions or baseline. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that low-load resistance exercise combined with blood flow restriction produces greater acute improvements in sprint performance in male sprinters than high-load training, accompanied by reductions in pennation angle and increases in muscle-tendon stiffness.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceMuscle, SkeletalResistance TrainingTendonsBiomechanical PhenomenaCross-Over StudiesHumansMaleRegional Blood FlowRunningYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID42412775
PMCPMC13340759

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.