Skip to content

Study note

Neuromuscular Fatigability Associated with Different Pacing Strategies During an Ultra-Endurance Pull-Up Task: A Case Study.

PMID 36618336 (2022): pacing — Time-trial performance (study note for endurance athletes).

Updated Jul 22, 2026

Read the study note

Study note • PMID 36618336

Neuromuscular Fatigability Associated with Different Pacing Strategies During an Ultra-Endurance Pull-Up Task: A Case Study.

International journal of exercise science2022 • DOI 10.70252/DYOL6987

How to use this page

This note summarizes one study record. Check the participants, methods, results, and limitations before applying it to training.

  • Design signal: controlled study.
  • Population relevance: mixed/unclear athlete specificity.
  • Consistency: single-study evidence.
  • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.

ELI5

In plain language

While neuromuscular fatigability has been previously characterized after running and cycling, no study has investigated an ultra-endurance upper body task. (controlled study; participants).

The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time-trial performance under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: While neuromuscular fatigability has been previously characterized after running and cycling, no study has investigated an ultra-endurance upper body task.
  • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Time-trial performance under the tested conditions.
  • Population: participants.
  • Protocol cues: abstract may omit dose/timing; use the full paper to replicate accurately.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: pacing.
  • Dose/time/duration: abstract doesn’t include enough detail; use the full paper’s methods section.
  • Outcomes: Time-trial performance.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it may help, and who should be cautious

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (participants) working on pacing.
  • Athletes who can measure Time-trial performance with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should be cautious

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: controlled study.
  • Population: participants.
  • Outcomes measured: Time-trial performance.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 36618336 (2022) — International journal of exercise science.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

In preparation for a world record attempt, three pacing strategies to perform 1980 pull-ups in 6 hrs were compared during independent sessions: fast pace, long recovery (FL), fast pace, multiple short recoveries (FMS), and slow pace, no recovery (SN).

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations and bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Adaptive AI coach for iPhone

Meet your adaptive AI coach.

Tell your coach what you are training for. It builds the plan, follows the work you complete, and adapts upcoming training when recovery, your schedule, or real life changes.

Keep going

Sources