Cited by 110Sports Performance and TrainingMuscle activation and electromyography studiesCardiovascular and exercise physiology

Changes in strength and cross sectional area of the elbow flexors as a result of isometric strength training

Davies, J., Parker, D. F., Rutherford, O. M., Jones, D. A.·1988·European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology

Abstract

Changes in strength and size of the elbow flexor muscles have been compared during six weeks of isometric strength training in six male and six female subjects. Isometric training of one arm resulted in a significant increase in isometric force (14.5 +/- 5.1%, mean +/- SD, n = 12). No differences were seen in the response of male and female subjects. The extent of the change was similar to that reported for training studies of other muscles, thus refuting the suggestion that the elbow flexors may be especially amenable to training. Biceps and brachialis cross-sectional area (CSA) was measured from mid-upper arm X-ray computerized tomography before and after training. Muscles increased in area (5.4 +/- 3.8%) but this was smaller than, and not correlated with, the increase in strength. The main change in the first six weeks of strength training was therefore an increase in the force generated per unit cross-sectional area of muscle. The arrangement of fibres in the biceps is nearly parallel to the action of the muscle and it is argued that the increase in force per unit cross-sectional area is unlikely to be due to changes in the pennation of the muscle fibres as has been suggested for other muscles.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf01075986

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Davies, J., Parker, D. F., Rutherford, O. M., & Jones, D. A.
Affiliations
  • St Thomas' Hospital (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Venue
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology
Published
1988-11
Volume
57
Issue
6
Pages
667-670
ISSN
  • 0020-9376 (ISSN-L)
  • 0301-5548
  • 1439-6327
OpenAlex
W1985389268
Cited by
110
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
3.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Applied Physiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
isometric strength training, elbow flexors, biceps brachii, brachialis, muscle cross-sectional area, muscle strength, sex differences, muscle hypertrophy
MeSH terms
Adult, Elbow, Female, Humans, Isometric Contraction, Male, Muscle Contraction, Muscles, Physical Education and Training

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review