ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Sensitivity of the load-velocity relationship variables to discriminate the level of fatigue induced by multiple sets of the smith-machine squat exercise.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07307963 (Sensitivity of the Load-Velocity Relationship Variables to Discriminate the Level of Fatigue Induced by Multiple Sets of the Smith-Machine Squat Exercise), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Sensitivity of the Load-Velocity Relationship Variables to Discriminate the Level of Fatigue Induced by Multiple Sets of the Smith-Machine Squat Exercise
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fragmented versus traditional resistance training: a randomized controlled trial on muscular strength, endurance, and enjoyment in recreationally trained young adults.Journal of exercise science and fitness · 2026Article
- Pre-fatigue Direct 1RM Testing vs. Post-fatigue Load-Velocity Profiling: Which Better Predicts Maximal Strength in the Deadlift After Resistance Training?Sports medicine - open · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe aim of the research was to examine the sensitivity of load-velocity (L-V) relationship parameters (L0, v0, and Aline (area under the L–V line; Aline = L0×v0/ 2)) in detecting fatigue after different fatigue protocols as well as their correlation with changes in 1-repetition maximum (1RM).
methodsAfter a familiarization and preliminary testing session which was used for 1RM smith-machine squat (SMS) determination and performing a set of repetition to failure with 70%1RM load, 28 resistance-trained men randomly performed three fatigue protocols. All fatigue protocols were carried out between two incremental loading tests, conducted at the beginning (pre-session) and end (post-session) of the training session. The characteristics of the fatigue protocols were as follows: (i) control protocol: no training, (ii) moderate-fatigue protocol: 5 sets of the SMS exercise at 70%1RM performing half the maximum possible number of repetitions, and (iii) high-fatigue protocol: 5 sets of the SMS exercise performed to failure against the 70%1RM.
resultsPost-session declines in 1RM (p < 0.001), L0 (p = 0.001) and Aline (p < 0.001) were the greatest after the high fatigue protocol, followed by the moderate fatigue protocol and finally the control protocol. Changes in v₀ did not differentiate between the fatigue protocols (p = 0.325). The post-session percentage change in 1RM was significantly correlated with the percentage change in Aline (r = 0.832) and L0 (r = 0.764), but not with the percentage change in v0 (r= -0.012).
conclusionsThese results suggest that L-V relationship variables offer a highly sensitive and practical solution for fatigue monitoring. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT07307963 (First posted: 27/11/2025; retrospectively registered).
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.