Immediate Effects of Adding a Sciatic Nerve Slider Technique on Lumbar and Lower Quadrant Mobility in Soccer Players: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the immediate effect of a sciatic nerve slider technique added to sustained hamstring stretching on lumbar and lower quadrant flexibility. DESIGN: This was a randomized controlled pilot study. SUBJECTS: Eight (8) healthy male soccer players (21 +/- 3 years) were randomly assigned to 2 groups. INTERVENTIONS: Group A received 5 minutes of bilateral sustained hamstring stretching. Group B additionally received 60 seconds of a sciatic nerve slider technique for each leg. OUTCOMES: Pre- and postintervention outcomes taken by an assessor blinded to the treatment allocation of the participants included metric distance on finger-to-floor, sit and reach, and the modified Schöber tests and goniometric range of each hip for the straight-leg raise and each knee for seated slump test. Baseline between-group differences were examined with an independent t test and a two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance with p < 0.05 and p < 0.025 analyzed effects of the interventions. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group baseline differences (p > 0.2). There was a significant effect for time on all outcomes (p < 0.01) other than the sit and reach test (p = 0.8). A significant interaction between group . time with greater improvements in group B was found for the modified Schöber test (F = 5.5; p < 0.05), left straight-leg raise (F = 6.1; p < 0.05) and slump test in either leg (left F = 28.7; p = 0.002; right F = 4.9; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Adding a sciatic nerve slider technique to sustained hamstring stretching led to greater immediate increases in both lumbar and lower quadrant flexibility in young healthy soccer players as measured by four of the seven outcomes used. Study limitations and suggestions for future studies are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".