Effects of aerobic training on the exercise-induced decline in short-passing ability in junior soccer players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To examine the effects of aerobic interval training on the decline in short-passing ability caused by a short bout of high-intensity intermittent activities. For this randomized controlled trial, 26 junior soccer players (mean age, 17.8 +/- 0.6 years; mean height, 178 +/- 5 cm; mean body mass, 74.5 +/- 6.9 kg) were recruited. After baseline measurements, subjects were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups: the control group (CG) or the aerobic interval training group (ITG). The ITG completed 4 weeks of high-intensity aerobic training, consisting of 4 bouts of running for 4 min at 90%-95% of maximal heart rate, with 3 min of active recovery between sets, in addition to normal training. Maximum oxygen uptake, Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test level 1 (YYIRT), and short-passing ability (measured using the Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT)) were measured before and after a 5 min high-intensity simulation (HIS), reproducing the most intense phase of a match. The ITG (n = 11), but not the CG (n = 10), showed a significant 12% and 4% increase in YYIRT and maximal oxygen consumption after training, respectively, and reduced the worsening in LSPT penalty time after the HIS (p < 0.05). The relative exercise intensity during HIS decreased in the ITG only (p < 0.01). Our results demonstrated that junior soccer players may benefit from aerobic training to attenuate the decline in short-passing ability caused by a short bout of intermittent activities completed at the same pretraining workload.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".