ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of strength, skin temperature and muscle activation in traditional and eccentric training in Paralympic Powerlifting athletes.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Paralympic Powerlifting (PP) is a maximum strength modality, where male athletes demonstrated greater relative and absolute strength compared to conventional powerlifting. This study aimed to assess the acute effects of traditional training (TT) and eccentric training (ET) methods on Maximum Isometric Strength (MIF), Time to Maximum Isometric Force (Time), Muscle Activation (sEMG), and Skin Temperature (Thermo) in twelve male PP athletes (mean age 30.25 ± 8.13; body weight 72.36 ± 18.47). The training consisted of 5 sets of 5 repetitions (5 × 5), with 80% 1RM in the TT method and in the ET 80% was adopted in the concentric phase and 110% in the eccentric phase, adopting a minimum rest of 3 min between sets and the cadence used was approximately 2 s in the eccentric phase and 1 s in the concentric phase for the ET and 1 s in each phase for the TT. Athletes competing nationally and internationally underwent Thermo, Time, and MIF assessments during TT (80%-1RM for both concentric and eccentric phases) and ET (80%-1RM concentric and 110%-1RM eccentric) at pre-training, post-training, 24 h, and 48 h. sEMG was evaluated in the clavicular portion of the pectoralis major (PMCP), sternal portion of the pectoralis major (PMSP), anterior Deltoid (AD), and Triceps Brachii (BT) during the final series (5 sets of 5 repetitions) of a training session. Athletes exhibited thermal differences in the PMCP muscle at 24 h between TT and ET (p = 0.020); Also, after the first 24 h, the AD showed differences between ET and TT (p = 0.016) and BT demonstrated differences between ET and TT (p = 0.028). The sEMG showed no significant differences between TT and ET (p > 0.05). The MIF displayed differences after 48 h between TT and ET (p = 0.004). The time showed no significant difference between TT and ET (p > 0.05). In conclusion, muscles involved in the bench press exhibited a significant increase in skin temperature with the ET method compared to TT, suggesting greater muscular fatigue. Furthermore, a higher MIF production was observed after the application of the TT in relation to ET, 48 h after training. In the ET, a lower MIF was observed than in the TT, indicating greater fatigue in this type of training.
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.