Biological sex differences in fatigue in resistance-trained individuals: A scoping review.
Level 1 - systematic review of randomized trials
Systematic scoping review mapping experimental studies according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines
PubMed 40112869 · doi:10.1055/a-2563-9449
What was done
This prospectively registered systematic scoping review followed PRISMA-ScR guidelines to evaluate biological sex differences in fatigue during and after resistance training specifically in trained individuals. Searches across PubMed, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus identified 4,020 records, resulting in 34 included studies. The review synthesized evidence across fatigue measures during single and multiple sets, post-exercise recovery at specific intervals (0–5 min, 1–6 h, 24 h, and 48–96 h), and metabolic responses.
What was found
The abstract reports no numerical data, effect sizes, or statistical metrics. It describes substantial heterogeneity across study designs and outcomes. Overall, most included studies found minor-to-no sex differences in neuromuscular fatigue. Greater fatigability in males during or immediately following resistance training was observed when: (1) complex free-weight exercises were performed with moderate loads, (2) rest periods were shorter, and (3) males were substantially stronger than females in relative terms.
Why it matters
This review clarifies that previously documented female fatigue resistance may not broadly generalize to resistance-trained cohorts. Sex-specific differences appear context-dependent rather than universal in trained populations.
Limits
The abstract provides no quantitative effect sizes or pooled estimates. Substantial heterogeneity in design and outcomes existed across the 34 included studies. Baseline disparities in relative strength and technical proficiency between sexes frequently confounded comparisons.
Cited by
- supports Scientific research on sex differences in recovery from resistance training shows mixed findings.