MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Effect Of A Mixed Method Pre- And Halftime Cooling Strategy On Soccer Skill Performance

2015· article· en· W2474279498 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Davis, Jason P. Brandenburg

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser Valley
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCore temperatureSession (web analytics)Heat stressCyclingMedicinePhysical therapyAnimal scienceSimulationComputer scienceAnesthesiaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Repeated sprinting ability and skill proficiency are key to success in team sports. Cooling lessens the thermal stress during repeated high intensity exercise, and as a result, better preserves repeated sprinting ability. It is unknown if cooling benefits skill performance. PURPOSE: To examine the effect of a mixed method cooling strategy on thermoregulatory responses and skill performance during simulated soccer in the heat. METHODS: Six male university soccer players completed 1 practice and 2 experimental sessions. In the experimental sessions, players completed 2 soccer halves. Each half consisted of a 36-min soccer specific cycling protocol (40 s at 3.3 Wkg-1 followed by 20 s at 1 Wkg-1 x 36 repeats) in the heat (30-32°C, 40-45% humidity). Skills testing made up the remainder of each half. Skill was assessed with a modified Loughborough Soccer Passing Test (LSPT) and a dribbling test. In one session cooling was applied for 25 min before the 1st half and for 15 min at halftime (COOL). Cooling involved ingestion of a sports drink slushy combined with wearing an ice vest. In the other session (CTL) players ingested sports drink. Core (TC) and tympanic temperature (TTY) were monitored throughout. RESULTS: TC at the start of the 1st half was lower in COOL than in CTL (37.0 ± 0.2 vs. 37.4 ± 0.1 °C; p=0.01). The increase in TC in the 1st half (1.3 ± 0.3 vs. 1.3 ± 0.5 °C), TC at the start of the 2nd half (37.4 ± 0.5 vs. 37.8 ± 0.3 °C), and the rise in TC in the 2nd half (0.9 ± 0.2 vs. 0.8 ± 0.5°C) were not different between COOL and CTL. TTY did not differ between COOL and CTL at any time. In COOL, the time needed to complete the LSPT in the 1st and 2nd half was 37.9 ± 1.1 s and 37.8 ± 0.4 s, respectively. Players amassed 8.1 ± 4.4 s and 5.4 ± 3.1 s of penalty time during these tests. Completion time and penalty time in CTL were 38.0 ± 1.2 s and 6.6 ± 2.3 (1st half) and 38.6 ± 1.7 s and 6.9 ± 4.0 s (2nd half). Time to complete the dribbling test in the 1st half equaled 7.0 ± 0.5 s and 6.9 ± 0.5 s in COOL and CTL. In the 2nd half these times equaled 7.1 ± 0.5 s and 7.2 ± 0.5 s. No between-condition differences were observed for any of the skill variables. CONCLUSION: The combination of ice slushy and ice vest cooling effectively reduced TC prior to the simulated soccer. Although thermal stress was slightly lower during the 1st and 2nd half due to cooling, this did not result in better skill performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicSports Performance and Training→French-language works237,207→