ArticleScientific reports2025
Optimizing the methodology for precise estimation of skeletal muscle fiber type proportions in humans.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Isolating individual muscle fibers and characterizing their myosin heavy chain (MHC) content using SDS-PAGE has become an increasingly common method for describing skeletal muscle fiber type proportions. In this study, we aimed to assess how the number of muscle fibers analyzed, and whether they are characterized in the order of isolation or randomly selected from a larger pool of muscle fibers, affects the precision of fiber type proportion estimates. A total of 170 individual muscle fibers were isolated from vastus lateralis biopsies from each of eight human subjects, and their MHC isoform content was analyzed using SDS-PAGE. To evaluate the precision of fiber type proportion estimates, we employed a resampling approach, varying both the muscle fiber sample size (25, 50, or 100 fibers) and the selection method (ordered vs. random selection). Our results indicate that when analyzing a small number of muscle fibers, precision improves if the fibers are randomly selected from a larger pool rather than characterized in the order they were isolated. These findings have important implications for designing experiments to assess skeletal muscle fiber heterogeneity and its role in health and disease.
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.