Body composition and handgrip strength in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu athletes: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to review the evidence available regarding body composition and maximal isometric handgrip strength values and establish average values and relationships between these variables in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu athletes. Methods: MEDLINE through PubMed; base plate; Web of Science; Scopus; Pedro; CDSR; CCRCT; LILACS; Educational Resources; EBSCO; and ADOLEC databases were explored to identify articles that met selection criteria. Observational or comparative studies evaluating the body composition and maximal isometric handgrip strength of BJJ athletes through dynamometry. Results: Only ten papers (n = 394 athletes) met selection criteria. The methodological quality of the studies assessed with the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was rated fair to good, and the methodological quality of the studies assessed with the appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies was rated low to moderate. The population studied was predominantly male (n = 364), with two studies including females (n = 30). Two reported maximal isometric handgrip strength, four reported right- or left-hand grip strength, and five reported handgrip strength differentiating between dominant and non-dominant hands. All selected studies reported weight, height, and body fat percentages, six reported body mass index, three reported fat-free mass or muscle mass percentages, and two reported lean body mass or somatotype. Conclusions: We could not establish average values or relationships between the variables studied due to lack of concordance in the reporting of these variables in the studies reviewed. It is necessary to standardize the variables reported in studies regarding this sport to establish comparisons between scientific evidence.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".