ArticleJournal of human kinetics2014
The impact of immediate verbal feedback on the improvement of swimming technique.
Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present research attempts to ascertain the impact of immediate verbal feedback (IVF) on modifications of stroke length (SL). In all swimming styles, stroke length is considered an essential kinematic parameter of the swimming cycle. It is important for swimming mechanics and energetics. If SL shortens while the stroke rate (SR) remains unchanged or decreases, the temporal-spatial structure of swimming is considered erroneous. It results in a lower swimming velocity. Our research included 64 subjects, who were divided into two groups: the experimental - E (n=32) and the control - C (n=32) groups. A pretest and a post-test were conducted. The subjects swam the front crawl over the test distance of 25m at Vmax. Only the E group subjects were provided with IVF aiming to increase their SL. All tests were filmed by two cameras (50 samples•s-1). The kinematic parameters of the swimming cycle were analyzed using the SIMI Reality Motion Systems 2D software (SIMI Reality Motion Systems 2D GmbH, Germany). The movement analysis allowed to determine the average horizontal swimming velocity over 15 meters. The repeated measures analysis of variance ANOVA with a post-hoc Tukey range test demonstrated statistically significant (p<0.05) differences between the two groups in terms of SL and swimming velocity. IVF brought about a 6.93% (Simi method) and a 5.09% (Hay method) increase in SL, as well as a 2.92% increase in swimming velocity.
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.