The DOI matches its Crossref record; 208 of the 208 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Sex differences in human fatigability: mechanisms and insight to physiological responses
Open accessAbstract
Sex-related differences in physiology and anatomy are responsible for profound differences in neuromuscular performance and fatigability between men and women. Women are usually less fatigable than men for similar intensity isometric fatiguing contractions. This sex difference in fatigability, however, is task specific because different neuromuscular sites will be stressed when the requirements of the task are altered, and the stress on these sites can differ for men and women. Task variables that can alter the sex difference in fatigability include the type, intensity and speed of contraction, the muscle group assessed and the environmental conditions. Physiological mechanisms that are responsible for sex-based differences in fatigability may include activation of the motor neurone pool from cortical and subcortical regions, synaptic inputs to the motor neurone pool via activation of metabolically sensitive small afferent fibres in the muscle, muscle perfusion and skeletal muscle metabolism and fibre type properties. Non-physiological factors such as the sex bias of studying more males than females in human and animal experiments can also mask a true understanding of the magnitude and mechanisms of sex-based differences in physiology and fatigability. Despite recent developments, there is a tremendous lack of understanding of sex differences in neuromuscular function and fatigability, the prevailing mechanisms and the functional consequences. This review emphasizes the need to understand sex-based differences in fatigability to shed light on the benefits and limitations that fatigability can exert for men and women during daily tasks, exercise performance, training and rehabilitation in both health and disease.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Sex-based differences are well known to exist in endurance performance where, relative to body mass and composition, females would outperform males during exercise at submaximal intensities (Hunter et al. 2014).”
From Analysis of sex-based differences in energy substrate utilization during moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (2022) · cites this paper as Hunter et al. 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“This fact has been attributed to a higher lipolytic efficiency (Bergström and Hultman 1966) and to a greater relative distribution and activation of fatigue resistant slow twitch fibers (Zierath and Hawley 2004; Hunter 2014; Temesi et al. 2015; Tiller et al. 2021).”
From Analysis of sex-based differences in energy substrate utilization during moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (2022) · cites this paper as Hunter 2014
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“women possess a greater capacity to resist fatigue [87]”
From Loading recommendations for muscle strength, hypertrophy, and local endurance: a re-examination of the repetition continuum. (2021) · cites this paper as [87]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Spinal and Supraspinal Factors in Human Muscle Fatigue
Gandevia, S. C. (2001) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.2001.81.4.1725 · Cited by 3,855
Fiber Types in Mammalian Skeletal Muscles
Schiaffino, S., & Reggiani, C. (2011) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00031.2010 · Cited by 3,022
Exercise training and nutritional supplementation for physical frailty in very elderly people
Fiatarone, M. A., O'Neill, E. F., Ryan, N. D., Clements, K. M., Solares, G. R., Nelson, M. E., Roberts, S. B., Kehayias, J. J., Lipsitz, L. A., & Evans, W. J. (1994) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199406233302501 · Cited by 2,857
Sex, gender, and pain: a review of recent clinical and experimental findings
Fillingim, R. B., King, C. D., Ribeiro-Dasilva, M. C., Rahim-Williams, B., & Riley, J. L. (2009) · The Journal of Pain · doi:10.1016/j.jpain.2008.12.001 · Cited by 2,766
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
Sex bias in neuroscience and biomedical research
Beery, A. K., & Zucker, I. (2011) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.002 · Cited by 1,763
Muscle fatigue: what, why and how it influences muscle function
Enoka, R. M., & Duchateau, J. (2007) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2007.139477 · Cited by 1,502
Exercise-Induced Muscle Damage in Humans
Clarkson, P. M., & Hubal, M. J. (2002) · American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · doi:10.1097/00002060-200211001-00007 · Cited by 1,478
Voluntary strength and fatigue
Merton, P. A. (1954) · The Journal of Physiology · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.1954.sp005070 · Cited by 1,448
Neurobiology of muscle fatigue
Enoka, R. M., & Stuart, D. G. (1992) · Journal of Applied Physiology · doi:10.1152/jappl.1992.72.5.1631 · Cited by 1,433
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Test–Retest Reliability of the One-Repetition Maximum (1RM) Strength Assessment: a Systematic Review
Grgić, J., Lazinica, B., Schoenfeld, B. J., & Pedišić, Ž. (2020) · Sports Medicine - Open · doi:10.1186/s40798-020-00260-z · Cited by 399
Ansdell, P., Thomas, K., Hicks, K. M., Hunter, S. K., Howatson, G., & Goodall, S. (2020) · Experimental Physiology · doi:10.1113/ep088548 · Cited by 403
Self-citationSchoenfeld, B. J., Grgic, J., Van Every, D. W., & Plotkin, D. L. (2021) · Sports · doi:10.3390/sports9020032 · Cited by 334
Nuzzo, J. L. (2022) · The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000004329 · Cited by 360
The Relevance of Sex Differences in Performance Fatigability
Hunter, S. K. (2016) · Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000000928 · Cited by 328
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Hunter, S. K.
- Affiliations
- Marquette University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hunter, S. K.
- ORCID
- Hunter, S. K.
- Venue
- Acta Physiologica
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-02-25
- Volume
- 210
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 768-789
- ISSN
- 1748-1708 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4111134
- OpenAlex
- W2043456716
- Cited by
- 595
- References
- 208
- Citations by year
- 2026: 76 · 2025: 72 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 61 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 24 · 2014: 12
- FWCI
- 15.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Acta Physiologica (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- e-Publications@Marquette (Marquette University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Aging (R15AG039697)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Sex and Gender in Healthcare
- Keywords
- sex differences, muscle fatigue, fatigability, neuromuscular performance, isometric contraction, motoneuron pools, afferent nerve fibers, muscle blood flow, skeletal muscle metabolism, task specificity, sex bias in research, exercise performance, rehabilitation
- MeSH terms
- Female, Humans, Male, Sex Factors, Stress, Physiological, 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.
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
