The Effect of Muscle Damage on Strength and Fatigue Deficits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies have reported prolonged force deficits after a bout of resistance training. However there is a dearth of information on the neuromuscular mechanisms underlying these deficits. This study examined whether an acute bout of resistance training had prolonged detrimental effects on muscle activation and excitation-contraction coupling. Two groups of 16 subjects each were tested before resistance exercise and at 1, 3, 5, and 7 days postexercise. A dynamic group was tested for concentric and eccentric 1 repetition maximum and 3-methylhistidine (3-MH). An isometric group was tested for maximal voluntary contraction, muscle inactivation, relative fatigue, and evoked twitch properties. Both groups experienced similar increases in pain, limb circumference, and decreased range of motion between 1 and 3 days postexercise. Decrements occurred with eccentric strength, maximal voluntary contraction, muscle inactivation, relative fatigue, twitch amplitude, and increases in 3-MH. Although muscle damage-induced characteristics (pain, swelling, range of motion, 3-MH) were not correlated with neuromuscular impairments (muscle activation, force output), disruption of excitation-contraction coupling may have contributed to decrements in fatigue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".