Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 304

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Narrative Review of Sex Differences in Muscle Strength, Endurance, Activation, Size, Fiber Type, and Strength Training Participation Rates, Preferences, Motivations, Injuries, and Neuromuscular Adaptations

Open access
Nuzzo, James L.·2023·Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
DOI 10.1519/jsc.0000000000004329
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Nuzzo, JL. Narrative review of sex differences in muscle strength, endurance, activation, size, fiber type, and strength training participation rates, preferences, motivations, injuries, and neuromuscular adaptations. J Strength Cond Res 37(2): 494–536, 2023—Biological sex and its relation with exercise participation and sports performance continue to be discussed. Here, the purpose was to inform such discussions by summarizing the literature on sex differences in numerous strength training–related variables and outcomes—muscle strength and endurance, muscle mass and size, muscle fiber type, muscle twitch forces, and voluntary activation; strength training participation rates, motivations, preferences, and practices; and injuries and changes in muscle size and strength with strength training. Male subjects become notably stronger than female subjects around age 15 years. In adults, sex differences in strength are more pronounced in upper-body than lower-body muscles and in concentric than eccentric contractions. Greater male than female strength is not because of higher voluntary activation but to greater muscle mass and type II fiber areas. Men participate in strength training more frequently than women. Men are motivated more by challenge, competition, social recognition, and a desire to increase muscle size and strength. Men also have greater preference for competitive, high-intensity, and upper-body exercise. Women are motivated more by improved attractiveness, muscle “toning,” and body mass management. Women have greater preference for supervised and lower-body exercise. Intrasexual competition, mate selection, and the drive for muscularity are likely fundamental causes of exercise behaviors in men and women. Men and women increase muscle size and strength after weeks of strength training, but women experience greater relative strength improvements depending on age and muscle group. Men exhibit higher strength training injury rates. No sex difference exists in strength loss and muscle soreness after muscle-damaging exercise.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1519/jsc.0000000000004329

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 304

Metadata

Authors
Nuzzo, J. L.
Venue
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2022-11-15
Volume
37
Issue
2
Pages
494-536
ISSN
1064-8011 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1519/jsc.0000000000004329
OpenAlex
W4318026421
Cited by
304
References
35
FWCI
15.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.