Preseason neuromuscular versus endurance training leads to greater improvements in isokinetic strength, muscle damage, and inflammation parameters in highly trained female soccer players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The preseason offers an opportunity to achieve an optimal level of physical fitness for the entire season. The question arises whether the training programs induce muscle damage and inflammatory processes which may have a negative impact on players' readiness at the beginning of the season. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of a preseason neuromuscular training program (NMT) versus endurance training (ET) on measures of isokinetic strength, muscle damage, and blood parameters in female soccer players. METHODS: Twenty-two highly trained female soccer players with a mean age of 17.0 ± 1.3 years were randomly assigned to a NMT (n = 11) or ET group (n = 11). NMT and ET programs lasted six weeks with three sessions per week, each 45-60 min. NMT included strength, power, linear sprint and change-of-direction speed, and dynamic stability exercises. ET comprised running, circuit drills, coordination, aerobic circuit, interval-training, speed-endurance exercises, and dynamic stretching. isokinetic knee flexor/extensor parameters (e.g., peak torque) were tested pre- and post-training. Blood samples were analyzed for muscle damage markers: creatine kinase (CK), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and inflammation markers: C-reactive protein (CRP), and interleukin-6 (IL-6). RESULTS: Significant group-by-time interactions were found for all isokinetic parameters (0.001 < p < 0.012, 1.35 < d < 4.17). Post-hoc tests revealed significant improvements following NMT but not ET (0.001 < p < 0.045, 0.81 < d < 2.46). Additionally, there were also significant group-by-time interactions for IL-6 (p = 0.005; d = 0.31), CK (p = 0.026; d = 1.0), and LDH (p < 0.003; d = 1.44). Variations in IL-6, CK, and LDH determined by post-hoc tests indicated decreases in NMT but not ET (IL-6: p = 0.005, d = 1.27; CK: p = 0.023, d = 1.01; LDH: p = 0.002, d = 1.42). CONCLUSIONS: Six weeks of preseason NMT produced larger improvements in isokinetic strength and less muscle damage and inflammation in highly-trained female soccer players compared to ET group.
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) | 0.003 | 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".