Effects of Parkour Training on Health-Related Physical Fitness in Male Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Many children become less active as they age which increases their risk of developing of chronic conditions. Traditional forms of physical activity may not be optimal for them. There is a need for more attractive form of training to try and increase physical activity levels and improve the fitness of children. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of performing parkour training on measures of cardiorespiratory fitness, strength and body composition in adolescents. Methods: Using a single-group design, 12 males (age 16 ± 2 yr, weight = 69 ± 12 kg, height = 177 ± 7 cm) took part in a controlled indoor parkour intervention 2 days/week for 10 weeks. Participants underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), strength testing and body composition assessment before and after the exercise intervention. Results: Peak oxygen uptake (O 2 peak) significantly increased from 50.0 ± 4.9 ml·min -1 ·kg -1 to 52.5 ± 4.3 ml·min -1 ·kg -1 . Oxygen uptake at a standardized submaximal (10 km·h -1 ) running speed (O 210km/h ) significantly decreased from 37.7 ± 1.6 ml·min -1 ·kg -1 to 36.7 ± 1.9 ml·min -1 ·kg -1 . Oxygen uptake at anaerobic treshold (O 2 @AT) significantly increased from 38.4 ± 4.3 ml·min -1 ·kg -1 to 40.5 ± 3.9 ml·min -1 ·kg -1 , heart rate at anaerobic treshold (HR@AT) and running speed at anaerobic threshold. We also found a significant increase in standing broad jump from 234 ± 29 cm to 251 ± 23 cm and bent arm hang from 34 ± 24 s to 37 ± 24 s. Conclusion: Parkour training is an effective intervention to improve cardiorespiratory fitness and strength in adolescent males. Parkour is a viable form of physical activity to improve the health and fitness of children and adolescents.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".