Neuromuscular Adaptations and Enhancement of Physical Performance in Female Basketball Players After 8 Weeks of Plyometric Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the effects of an 8-week in-season plyometric training (PT) program on the physical performance and neuromuscular adaptations of female basketball players. Twenty-seven elite female basketball players (aged 21.0 ± 2.6 years) were assigned between an experimental group ( n = 15) who substituted a part of their usual training with biweekly PT, and a control group ( n = 12) who maintained their standard basketball training. Analyses of variance and co-variance assessed changes in 10, 20, and 30 m sprint times, ability to change direction ( T -test) and jumping ability [squat jump (SJ) and countermovement jump (CMJ)] with electromyographic assessment of the vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, and rectus femoris muscles during jumping and meassurement of the isokinetic strength of the knee muscles. After 8 weeks of the plyometric program the experimental group enhanced change of direction performance (Δ = −3.90%, d = 0.67) and showed a greater thigh cross sectional area (Δ = 9.89%, d = 0.95) relative to controls. Neural adaptations included significant improvements of EMG parameters for the vastus medialis muscle during Squat Jumping (Δ = 109.3%, d = 0.59). However, trends to improvements of sprinting times and jumping performances did not reach statistical significance. In addition, there were no gains in the peak torque and the average power of the quadriceps and hamstring muscles at either slow or moderate test speeds. We conclude that 8-weeks of PT (72–126 jumps) was insufficient to improve many of the variables associated with basketball performance in our subject-group. Further studies of female basketball players, extending the program period and increasing the intensity and speed of jumps are recommended in the search for more significant results.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".