MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095052426 · doi:10.1177/1747954120968191

Differences in anthropometric and physical performance characteristics between U17, U19, and Senior Irish female international football players

2020· article· en· W3095052426 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Doyle, Declan Browne, Dan Horan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sports Science & Coaching · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnthropometrySprintFootballVertical jumpPhysical therapyFootball playersPsychologyMedicineJumpInternal medicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to compare the anthropometric physical performance characteristics of Irish female international footballers at U17, U19, and Senior age groups. Fifty-five (U17, n =24, U19, n =21, Senior, n = 10) female international football players participated in this study. The subjects underwent anthropometric measurements (height and body mass) and physical performance tests countermovement jump (CMJ), reactive strength index (RSI), 10-m, 20-m, 30-m linear sprint, and yo-yo intermittent recovery test level 1 (YYIR1). No significant differences were identified between any age groups for the anthropometric measures of height and body mass. Concerning the physical tests, senior players displayed greater CMJ scores in comparison with the U17 (P = 0.040). Senior players also possessed higher levels of reactive strength with large effect sizes present (ES = 0.83 - 0.92) in comparison to all age groups. No significant differences were identified between any of the age groups across the 10-m, 20-m, 30-m, and rolling 20-m linear speed assessments. Senior players covered the greatest distance in the YYIR1 (P = 0.0001) versus the U19 and U17. These results indicate there was no difference in the anthropometric profile of the age groups assessed. However, differences in physical performance characteristics were present between age groups, thus suggesting improvements in lower limb power and aerobic endurance are achievable in adulthood as players physically mature.

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 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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Sports Science & CoachingSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207