MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587368138 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000001815

The Effect of Standard Strength vs. Contrast Strength Training on the Development of Sprint, Agility, Repeated Change of Direction, and Jump in Junior Male Soccer Players

2017· article· en· W2587368138 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 · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSprintJumpVertical jumpPhysical therapyMathematicsStrength trainingSquatPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hammami, M, Negra, Y, Shephard, RJ, and Chelly, MS. The effect of standard strength vs. contrast strength training on the development of sprint, agility, repeated change of direction, and jump in junior male soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 31(4): 901-912, 2017-The aim was to compare the impact of 2 differing strength training (ST) programs on the athletic performance of junior male soccer players at a critical phase during their competitive season. Participants aged 16.0 ± 0.5 years were randomly assigned between control (C, n = 12), standard ST (n = 16), and contrast strength training (CST, n = 16), each performed twice a week. Athletic performance was assessed before and after the intervention using 8 tests: 40-m sprint, 4 × 5-m sprint (S4 × 5), 9-3-6-3-9 m sprint with 180° turns (S180°), 9-3-6-3-9 m sprint with backward and forward running (SBF), repeated shuttle sprint ability (RSSA), repeated change of direction (RCOD), squat jump (SJ), and countermovement jump (CMJ). The control group's (CG) performance tended to improve in some tests and decrease in others, but these changes were not statistically significant. Both training programs enhanced all sprint performances relative to controls (p ≤ 0.05). The strength training group (SG) and the CST group (CSG) increased significantly in S180°, SBF, and S4 × 5 relative to CG, although the S4 × 5 also increased in CSG relative to SG (p ≤ 0.05). No intergroup difference of RSSA performance was observed. The RCOD parameters increased significantly in CSG relative to both SG and CG (p ≤ 0.05). The SJ and CMJ height increased significantly in both experimental groups (p < 0.000). We conclude that during the competitive season, some measures of athletic performance in male soccer players were increased more by 8 weeks of CST than by ST.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.298 · 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