Effects of a Combined Upper- and Lower-Limb Plyometric Training Program on High-Intensity Actions in Female U14 Handball Players
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze the effects of a 9-week plyometric training program on the sprint times (5, 10, 20, and 30 m), change-of-direction speed (modified T test and modified Illinois test), jumping (squat jump, countermovement jump, countermovement jump with arms, and horizontal 5-jump test), upper-body strength (right and left handgrip, back extensor strength, and medicine ball throw), and balance (Y and stork balance tests) of female handball players. METHODS: Athletes were randomly divided into experimental (n = 21; age = 13.5 [0.3] y) and control (n = 20; age = 13.3 [0.3] y) groups. Training exercises and matches were performed together, but the experimental group replaced a part of their normal regimen by biweekly upper- and lower-limb plyometric training. RESULTS: Both groups improved performance, but to a greater extent in the experimental group compared with controls for 20- and 30-m sprint times (Δ% = 9.6, P < .05, d = 0.557 and Δ% = 20.9, P < .001, d = 1.07, respectively), change of direction (T test: P < .01, Δ% = 14.5, d = 0.993 and Illinois test: P < .01, Δ% = 7.9, d = 0.769), vertical and horizontal jumping (P < .05), all measures of upper-limb strength (P < .001), and left-leg stork balance (P < .001, Δ% = 49.9, d = 1.07). CONCLUSIONS: A plyometric training program allows female junior handball players to improve important components of their physical 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it