MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322628263 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000002428

Effects of Plyometric and Resistance Training on Muscle Strength, Explosiveness, and Neuromuscular Function in Young Adolescent Soccer Players

2018· article· en· W2322628263 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsometric exercisePlyometricsResistance trainingJumpPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineStrength trainingPhysical therapyMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

McKinlay, BJ, Wallace, P, Dotan, R, Long, D, Tokuno, C, Gabriel, D, and Falk, B. Effects of plyometric and resistance training on muscle strength, explosiveness, and neuromuscular function in young adolescent soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 32(11): 3039-3050, 2018-This study examined the effect of 8 weeks of free-weight resistance training (RT) and plyometric (PLYO) training on maximal strength, explosiveness, and jump performance compared with no added training (CON), in young male soccer players. Forty-one 11- to 13-year-old soccer players were divided into 3 groups (RT, PLYO, and CON). All participants completed isometric and dynamic (240°·s) knee extensions before and after training. Peak torque (pT), peak rate of torque development (pRTD), electromechanical delay (EMD), rate of muscle activation (Q50), m. vastus lateralis thickness (VLT), and jump performance were examined. Peak torque, pRTD, and jump performance significantly improved in both training groups. Training resulted in significant (p ≤ 0.05) increases in isometric pT (23.4 vs. 15.8%) and pRTD (15.0 vs. 17.6%), in RT and PLYO, respectively. During dynamic contractions, training resulted in significant increases in pT (12.4 and 10.8% in RT and PLYO, respectively), but not in pRTD. Jump performance increased in both training groups (RT = 10.0% and PLYO = 16.2%), with only PLYO significantly different from CON. Training resulted in significant increases in VLT (RT = 6.7% and PLYO = 8.1%). There were no significant EMD changes. In conclusion, 8-week free-weight resistance and plyometric training resulted in significant improvements in muscle strength and jump performance. Training resulted in similar muscle hypertrophy in the 2 training modes, with no clear differences in muscle performance. Plyometric training was more effective in improving jump performance, whereas free-weight RT was more advantageous in improving peak torque, where the stretch reflex was not involved.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it