ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2025
Effects of muscle quantity, muscle quality, and phase angle on whole-body reaction time in 5164 adults aged 20-91 years.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Maturity-specific trajectories of physical fitness in talented youth athletes: a longitudinal study of Japanese local talent identification and development programme.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Association of Abdominal Circumference with Stepping Reaction Time and Functional Balance Among Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Observational
- Evolution of Key Factors Influencing Performance Across Phases in Junior Short Sprints.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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
purposeMuscle quantity, defined as appendicular lean mass (ALM); muscle quality, defined as the ratio of muscle strength to ALM; and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)-derived phase angle (PhA) are determinants of physical performance. We examined whether muscle quality indices were significant predictors of the whole-body reaction time (WBRT) in healthy female and male adults aged 20-91 years.
methodsData from 5164 adults (2869 women and 2295 men; mean age ± standard deviation, 60.9 ± 15.6 years) were analyzed. Height and weight were measured, and body mass index was calculated. ALM was estimated using a previously validated 8-electrode multi-frequency BIA. PhA was measured at 50 kHz using a BIA device. Knee extension strength (KES), leg extension power (LEP), and flexibility were examined. The ALM to weight (ALM/weight), KES to ALM (KES/ALM), and LEP to KES (LEP/KES) ratios were calculated. In the WBRT test, participants were asked to stand on a force plate and jump upright as quickly as possible in response to a light stimulus. The WBRT was divided into the response initiation and motion execution phases.
resultsALM/weight, KES/ALM, LEP/KES, PhA, and flexibility were significant independent predictors of WBRT and the time of the motion execution phase (p < 0.001). However, PhA was not a significant predictor of the time of response initiation phase.
conclusionMuscle quantity (ALM/weight), muscle quality (KES/ALM and LEP/KES), PhA, and flexibility are determinants of WBRT test performance, particularly in the motion execution phase.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.