ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2026
Sex-specific allometric modeling and regression-residual normalization for size-adjusted strength assessment.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Body-mass normalization of powerlifting performance: development and independent validation of sex- and age-specific regression-residual scores.European journal of applied physiology · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBody mass strongly influences maximal strength, complicating comparisons across individuals of different sizes and sexes. Traditional ratio standards and fixed allometric exponents often fail to adequately reduce body-mass dependence. This study examined whether sex-specific regression-residual normalization derived from log-log allometric models could reduce body-mass dependence to non-significant residual variance across multiple resistance exercises within this sample.
methodsStrength data were obtained from 203 college-aged adults (133 males, 70 females) who performed one-repetition maximum (1RM) tests for the bench press, squat, deadlift, snatch, clean and jerk, and overhead press, along with a 90-s one-arm kettlebell snatch test. Sex-specific allometric models of the form ln(P) = ln(a) + b·ln(M) were fitted for each exercise. Standardized residuals (W-scores) were calculated as size-adjusted performance indices. Normalization effectiveness was evaluated using correlations and regression slopes relating body mass to both raw performance and W-scores.
resultsRaw strength performance was positively associated with body mass across all barbell lifts (males: r = 0.25-0.44; females: r = 0.37-0.50; all p ≤ 0.010; R² ≈ 0.06-0.25). After normalization, associations between body mass and W-scores were reduced to near zero (males: r = - 0.06 to 0.01; females: r = - 0.02 to - 0.01; all p ≥ 0.48). Regression slopes were close to zero, and 95% confidence intervals included zero across all tasks.
conclusionSex-specific regression-residual normalization based on log-log allometric modeling reduced statistical body-mass dependence to negligible levels across diverse strength tasks within this sample. By emphasizing statistical independence of the normalized outcome, this approach provides a statistical framework for generating size-adjusted strength metrics for within-sample comparisons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42191904What 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.