The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 23 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men
Open accessAbstract
In previous gender comparisons of muscle performance, men and women rarely have been closely matched, absolute force has not been equalized, and rates of fatigue and early recovery have not been determined. We compared adductor pollicis muscle performance at a similar absolute force development in healthy men and women (both n=9) matched for adductor pollicis maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force (132 ± 5 N for women and 136 ± 4 N for men, mean ± SE, P > 0.05). Subjects repeated static contractions at a target force of ≈50% of MVC force of rested muscle (68 ± 3 N or 51.9 ± 1.0% MVC for women and 72 ± 2 N or 53.0 ± 2.0% MVC for men, P > 0.05) for 5 s followed by 5 s rest until exhaustion, i.e. inability to maintain the target force for 5 s. MVC force was measured following each minute of exercise, at exhaustion, and after each minute for 3 min of passive recovery. For women compared with men: MVC force fell less after 1 min of exercise (to 93 ± 1% vs. 80 ± 3% of MVC force of rested muscle, respectively, P < 0.05); MVC force (N min–1) fell ≈2‐fold slower (P < 0.05); and endurance time to exhaustion was nearly two times longer (14.7 ± 1.6 min vs. 7.9 ± 0.7 min, P < 0.05). After declining to a similar level of MVC force of rested muscle at exhaustion (56 ± 1% for women and 56 ± 3% for men), MVC force rose faster in women than in men (to 71 ± 2% vs. 65 ± 3% of MVC force of rested muscle, respectively; P < 0.05) during the first minute of recovery. The findings are consistent with the hypothesis that slower adductor pollicis muscle fatigue in women is linked with differences between men and women both in impairment of force generating capacity, per se, and in rates of recovery between contractions.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In healthy men and women matched for adductor pollicis maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force, women fatigued more slowly, endured intermittent static contractions nearly twice as long, and recovered force faster in the first minute after exhaustion than men. The authors attribute the slower fatigue partly to a greater capacity to recover force between contractions, possibly via oxidative phosphorylation in fast-twitch fibres.
Key findings
- After 1 min of intermittent static contractions at ~50% MVC, MVC force fell to 93 ± 1% of rested MVC in women versus 80 ± 3% in men (P < 0.05), a ~3-fold greater fall in men (−27 ± 4 N vs. −9 ± 2 N, P < 0.01).
- Overall fatigue rate was ~2-fold slower in women: mean linear slope of MVC decline was −3.9 ± 0.5 N min⁻¹ for women vs. −8.0 ± 2.1 N min⁻¹ for men (P < 0.05).
- Endurance time to exhaustion was nearly twice as long in women (14.7 ± 1.6 min vs. 7.9 ± 0.7 min, P < 0.05); all men completed 4 min but none exceeded 12 min, while all women completed 10 min and only three of nine had reached exhaustion by minute 12.
- Exhaustion occurred at similar force in both sexes (56 ± 1% vs. 56 ± 3% of rested MVC, P > 0.05), but during the first minute of recovery MVC force rose faster in women (to 71 ± 2% vs. 65 ± 3% of rested MVC, P < 0.05); no significant gender difference remained at minutes 2 and 3.
Methods
- Cross-sectional comparison of 9 women and 9 men matched as closely as possible for rested adductor pollicis MVC force (132 ± 5 N vs. 136 ± 4 N, P > 0.05); matching was done by ranking results within each gender and discarding data from 8 women and 2 men out of 17 women and 11 men originally tested.
- Subjects performed intermittent static adductor pollicis contractions (5 s at a target of 50% of rested MVC, followed by 5 s rest) until exhaustion, with an MVC substituted every sixth contraction; MVCs were also measured at exhaustion and each minute for 3 min of passive recovery.
- Analysis used two-tailed unpaired t-tests for rested MVC, fatigue rate and endurance time, and two-factor ANOVA (gender × time) with Tukey's multiple comparison procedure for exercise and recovery force; significance set at P < 0.05. Women were tested in Palo Alto, CA and men in Natick, MA, using identical apparatus, procedures and investigators.
Limitations
- The paper states the design did not include measurements to distinguish potential gender differences in impairment of muscle activation (central motor drive, neuromuscular propagation, reflex excitation) as a cause of fatigue.
- The paper states the findings do not identify precise mechanisms responsible for the gender differences; the fibre-type and oxidative-phosphorylation explanations are explicitly presented as hypotheses.
- Evident from the text: men and women were tested at two different study locations, and the strength-matching procedure discarded a substantial portion of the originally tested subjects (8 of 17 women, 2 of 11 men), which the paper does not discuss as a limitation.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
13 Not checked yet · 9 Own result · 6 Own method · 6 Own interpretation
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“MVC force (N min ±1 ) fell %2-fold slower (P < 0.05)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Overall adductor pollicis muscle fatigue rate was %2-fold slower for women than for men.Mean linear slope of decline of adductor pollicis MVC force was ±3.9 0.5 N min )1 for women vs. ±8.02.1 N min )1 for men (P < 0.05).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Abstract
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For each of the nine pairs of men and women matched on rested MVC force, the woman had a longer endurance time to exhaustion (Fig. 4b).”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“For each matched pair, each woman had a longer endurance time than each man.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > RESULTS
plainstates an associationn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For women compared with men: MVC force fell less after 1 min of exercise (to 93 1% vs. 80 3% of MVC force of rested muscle, respectively, P < 0.05)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“By the end of the ®rst minute of intermittent static contractions, adductor pollicis MVC force had, from resting levels, fallen to 80 3% (P < 0.01) in men but only to 93 1% (P < 0.05) in women ± approximately a 3-fold greater fall for men compared with women (±27 4 N vs. ±9 2 N, respectively, P < 0.01)”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“endurance time to exhaustion was nearly two times longer (14.7 1.6 min vs. 7.9 0.7 min, P < 0.05).”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Overall, endurance time to exhaustion was almost 2-fold longer (P < 0.05) for women than for men (14.7 1.6 vs. 7.9 0.7 min, respectively).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Abstract
plainstates an associationn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“MVC force rose faster in women than in men (to 71 2% vs. 65 3% of MVC force of rested muscle, respectively; P < 0.05) during the ®rst minute of recovery.”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“By minute 1 following exhaustion, MVC force of the adductor pollicis muscle recovered more quickly for women than for men, reaching 71 2% vs. 65 3% of rested MVC force, respectively, (P < 0.05).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Abstract
plainstates a causen = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, after the ®rst minute of repeated static contractions, for each pair of men and women matched for MVC force of rested muscle, each woman maintained a higher percentage of rested MVC force than each man (Fig. 4a).”
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
“Each woman maintained a higher percentage of MVC force than each man.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > RESULTS
plainstates an associationn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
- Also stated in: § DISCUSSION · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After declining to a similar level of MVC force of rested muscle at exhaustion (56 1% for women and 56 3% for men)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Exhaustion occurred at nearly identical (P > 0.05) levels of force for women (56 1% of rested MVC force [73 3 N]) and men (56 3% rested MVC force [75 3 N]) (Fig. 3).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Abstract
plainn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At minutes 2 and 3 of recovery, there was no statistically signi®cant gender difference (i.e.P > 0.05) in the level of MVC force (see Fig. 3).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > RESULTS
plainn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Virtually absent recovery of force generating capacity during muscle ischaemia applied following fatiguing exercise (Reid 1928, Harris et al. 1976, Wiles & Edwards 1982) implies that early recovery of MVC force is closely linked with muscle oxidative phosphorylation.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Reid 1928
- Not checked yetcites Harris et al. 1976
- Not checked yetcites Wiles & Edwards 1982
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The markedly smaller decline in MVC force in women than in men in the ®rst minute of exercise therefore supports the hypothesis that adductor pollicis muscles of the women contained a higher percentage of more slowly fatiguable fast-twitch oxidative ®bres than those of the men.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kukulka & Clamann 1981
- Not checked yetcites Gollnick et al. 1974
- Not checked yetcites Freund 1983
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 7
- Probably not a substantial claim. 10
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All men were able to complete 4 min of static contractions at %50% MVC force but none could exercise beyond minute 12.In contrast, all women were able to complete 10 min of intermittent static contractions at the target force approximating 50% MVC.By minute 12, only three of the nine women had reached exhaustion.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > RESULTS
plainn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For the women, no statistically signi®cant differences in adductor pollicis muscle performance test results were observed between their follicular and luteal menstrual cycle phases (Fulco et al. 1998).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Subjects
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fulco et al. 1998
plainn = 17- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A more complete resynthesis of muscle high-energy phosphate between contractions would result in increased removal of products of highenergy phosphate breakdown such as inorganic phosphate and ADP; accumulations of which are likely to impair muscle performance (Cooke & Pate 1985, Sahlin et al. 1997).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Cooke & Pate 1985
- Not checked yetcites Sahlin et al. 1997
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Subjects repeated static contractions at a target force of %50% of MVC force of rested muscle (68 3 N or 51.9 1.0% MVC for women and 72 2 N or 53.0 2.0% MVC for men, P > 0.05)”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Absolute force developed at the target force of 50% of MVC was 68 3 N (range: 58±82 N) for women and 72 2 N (range: 62±80 N) for men (P > 0.05).These absolute forces represented 51.9 1.0% MVC force for women and 53.0 2.0% MVC force for men.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Recent observations (Herbert & Gandevia 1996) challenge Merton's earlier conclusion of virtually no neural component to fatigue during voluntary contractions of the adductor pollicis muscle (Merton 1954).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Herbert & Gandevia 1996
- Not checked yetcites Merton 1954
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We compared adductor pollicis muscle performance at a similar absolute force development in healthy men and women (both n 9) matched for adductor pollicis maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force (132 5 N for women and 136 4 N for men, mean SE, P > 0.05).”
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
“Adductor pollicis muscle strength was 132 5 N (range: 118±156 N) vs. 136 4 N (range: 113±151 N) for women and men, respectively (P > 0.05).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Abstract
plainn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § RESULTS · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From this line of reasoning, we postulate that the slower rate of muscle fatigue in women was partly associated with a greater capacity for oxidative phosphorylation in the fast-twitch ®bres of the adductor pollicis leading to a more complete recovery of highenergy phosphate to fuel muscle performance during rest periods between contractions.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
hedgedstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
In the paper
“There is ample general evidence that, in addition to events originating in active muscle, processes initiated in the nervous system also may contribute to impaired performance of fatigued muscle (cf.Gandevia et al. 1995).”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Gandevia et al. 1995
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In response to a physical activity questionnaire, each gender indicated participation to a very similar degree in regular physical activity and sport.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Subjects
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The more rapid early recovery of MVC force for women than for men after exhausting exercise implies a faster recovery of force between submaximal contractions and suggests the slower rate of adductor pollicis muscle fatigue and superior muscle endurance of women relates in part to an enhanced ability to recover between intense muscular contractions.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To ensure familiarization with all equipment, personnel and procedures and to learn to execute intermittent static contractions exclusively with the adductor pollicis muscle, subjects underwent at least one preliminary adductor pollicis muscle testing session prior to the de®nitive experiments.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > General experimental design and procedures
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“These observations (Herbert & Gandevia 1996) are consistent with the view that the gender difference observed by us also may relate in part to a difference between men and women in the degree of muscle activation.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Herbert & Gandevia 1996
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the present experimental design did not include measurements to distinguish potential gender differences in impairment of muscle activation as a cause of voluntary muscle fatigue.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“A gender difference in the extent of impairment of activation of fatigued muscle ± as evidenced by a different relationship between falling muscle force and declining electromyographic activity in men vs. women (Hakkinen 1993) ± may relate to a potential male-female difference in central motor drive, impaired neuromuscular propagation and/or a fall in neural excitation of muscle of re¯ex origin.”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hakkinen 1993
hedgedstates a possible cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The women performed muscle testing at the Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center of the Palo Alto Veterans Administration Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA (altitude: 30 m).The men were tested at the US Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine in Natick, MA (altitude: 50 m).At both locations, the identical muscle testing apparatus, testing and calibration procedures, force trans”
§ Slower fatigue and faster recovery of the adductor pollicis muscle in women matched for strength with men > Study locations
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
The observed gender differences in adductor pollicis fatigue and recovery are not due to differences between the groups in age, height, or weight.
“Age, height, and weight were 24 1 year, 169 2 cm, and 64 3 kg for the women and 29 1 year, 179 2 cm and 79 3 kg for the men.”
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“After intermittent bouts of isometric contraction (5 s on and 5 s off) in the adductor pollicis muscle, women fatigue more slowly and to a smaller degree than men (31).”
From Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition (2015) · cites this paper as [31]
In the citing paper
“Endurance is longer in women (15 min) compared with men (8 min), and after reaching exhaustion, recovery occurs faster in women than in men (31).”
From Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition (2015) · cites this paper as [31]
Citations
Cites
Data on the distribution of fibre types in thirty-six human muscles
Johnson, M. A., Polgar, J., Weightman, D., & Appleton, D. (1973) · Journal of the Neurological Sciences · doi:10.1016/0022-510x(73)90023-3 · Cited by 2,200
Voluntary strength and fatigue
Merton, P. A. (1954) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1954.sp005070 · Cited by 1,448
Gender differences in strength and muscle fiber characteristics
Miller, A. E. J., MacDougall, J. D., Tarnopolsky, M. A., & Sale, D. G. (1993) · European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology · doi:10.1007/bf00235103 · Cited by 1,094
Kukulka, C. G., & Clamann, H. P. (1981) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/0006-8993(81)90266-3 · Cited by 583
The time course of phosphorylcreatine resynthesis during recovery of the quadriceps muscle in man
Harris, R. C., Edwards, R. H. T., Hultman, E., Nordesj�, L. O., Nylind, B., & Sahlin, K. (1976) · Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1007/bf00585149 · Cited by 527
The effects of ADP and phosphate on the contraction of muscle fibers
Cooke, R., & Pate, E. F. (1985) · Biophysical Journal · doi:10.1016/s0006-3495(85)83837-6 · Cited by 512
Gender differences in substrate for endurance exercise
Tarnopolsky, L. J., MacDougall, J. D., Atkinson, S. A., Tarnopolsky, M. A., & Sutton, J. R. (1990) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/jappl.1990.68.1.302 · Cited by 470
Motor unit and muscle activity in voluntary motor control.
Freund, H. (1983) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.1983.63.2.387 · Cited by 411
Neuromuscular Fatigue and Recovery in Male and Female Athletes during Heavy Resistance Exercise
Häkkinen, K. (1993) · International Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1055/s-2007-1021146 · Cited by 206
Endurance capacity of untrained males and females in isometric and dynamic muscular contractions
Maughan, R. J., Harmon, M., Leiper, J. B., SALE, D. G., & Delman, A. (1986) · European Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1007/bf00422739 · Cited by 206
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sex differences in human fatigability: mechanisms and insight to physiological responses
Hunter, S. K. (2014) · Acta Physiologica · doi:10.1111/apha.12234 · Cited by 595
Sex-Based Differences in Skeletal Muscle Kinetics and Fiber-Type Composition
Haizlip, K. M., Harrison, B. C., & Leinwand, L. A. (2015) · Physiology · doi:10.1152/physiol.00024.2014 · Cited by 521
Sex Differences in Human Skeletal Muscle Fatigue
Hicks, A. L., Kent-Braun, J., & Ditor, D. S. (2001) · Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews · doi:10.1097/00003677-200107000-00004 · Cited by 393
The Influence of Estrogen on Skeletal Muscle: Sex Matters
Enns, D. L., & Tiidus, P. M. (2010) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.2165/11319760-000000000-00000 · Cited by 374
Hunter, S. K., & Enoka, R. M. (2001) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/jappl.2001.91.6.2686 · Cited by 354
Metadata
- Authors
- Fulco, Rock, Muza, Lammi, Cymerman, Butterfield, Moore, Braun, & Lewis
- Affiliations
- U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine (US)
- Boston University (US)
- Stanford University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Fulco
- Venue
- Acta Physiologica Scandinavica
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-11
- Volume
- 167
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 233-239
- ISSN
- 0001-6772 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-201X
- OpenAlex
- W2081459731
- Semantic Scholar
- 6fea1dc572e42d68f559b85ac5c3cd9ef5a63207
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 6.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Acta Physiologica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
- Keywords
- adductor pollicis, muscle fatigue, fatigue recovery, sex differences, endurance, isometric contraction, women
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Electric Stimulation, Exercise Test, Female, Humans, Male, Muscle Contraction, Sex Characteristics, Thumb, Transducers, Pressure, Muscle, Skeletal, Muscle Fatigue
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
