Trial reportJournal of athletic training
A methodologic approach for normalizing angular work and velocity during isotonic and isokinetic eccentric training.
Trial report in Journal of athletic training. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Adherence to Strength Training and Lower Rates of Sports Injury in Contact Sports: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextResistance exercise training commonly is performed against a constant external load (isotonic) or at a constant velocity (isokinetic). Researchers comparing the effectiveness of isotonic and isokinetic resistance-training protocols need to equalize the mechanical stimulus (work and velocity) applied.
objectiveTo examine whether the standardization protocol could be adjusted and applied to an eccentric training program.
designControlled laboratory study.
settingControlled research laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsTwenty-one sport science male students (age = 20.6 ± 1.5 years, height = 178.0 ± 4.0 cm, mass = 74.5 ± 9.1 kg). INTERVENTION(S): Participants performed 9 weeks of isotonic (n = 11) or isokinetic (n = 10) eccentric training of knee extensors that was designed so they would perform the same amount of angular work at the same mean angular velocity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Angular work and angular velocity.
resultsThe isotonic and isokinetic groups performed the same total amount of work (-185.2 ± 6.5 kJ and -184.4 ± 8.6 kJ, respectively) at the same angular velocity (21 ± 1°/s and 22°/s, respectively) with the same number of repetitions (8.0 and 8.0, respectively). Bland-Altman analysis showed that work (bias = 2.4%) and angular velocity (bias = 0.2%) were equalized over 9 weeks between the modes of training.
conclusionsThe procedure developed allows angular work and velocity to be standardized over 9 weeks of isotonic and isokinetic eccentric training of the knee extensors. This method could be useful in future studies in which researchers compare neuromuscular adaptations induced by each type of training mode with respect to rehabilitating patients after musculoskeletal injury.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.