ArticleJournal of human kinetics2015
Specific Measurement of Tethered Running Kinetics and its Relationship to Repeated Sprint Ability.
Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complex networks analysis reinforces centrality hematological role on aerobic-anaerobic performances of the Brazilian Paralympic endurance team after altitude training.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Integrating mechanical, physiological, and muscle oxygenation responses during field-based tethered repeated-sprint exercise in male professional soccer players.Physiological reports · 2026Article
- Comparison of parameters derived from a three-minute all-out test with classical benchmarks for running exercise.PloS one · 2022Article
- New Insights into Mechanical, Metabolic and Muscle Oxygenation Signals During and After High-Intensity Tethered Running.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Novel paddle stroke analysis for elite slalom kayakers: Relationship with force parameters.PloS one · 2018Article
- Computational and Complex Network Modeling for Analysis of Sprinter Athletes' Performance in Track Field Tests.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Repeated sprint ability has been widely studied by researchers, however, analysis of the relationship between most kinetic variables and the effect of fatigue is still an ongoing process. To search for the best biomechanical parameter to evaluate repeated sprint ability, several kinetic variables were measured in a tethered field running test and compared regarding their sensitivity to fatigue and correlation with time trials in a free running condition. Nine male sprint runners (best average times: 100 m = 10.45 ± 0.07 s; 200 m = 21.36 ± 0.17 s; 400 m = 47.35 ± 1.09 s) completed two test sessions on a synthetic track. Each session consisted of six 35 m sprints interspersed by 10 s rest under tethered field running or free running conditions. Force, power, work, an impulse and a rate of force development were all directly measured using the sensors of a new tethered running apparatus, and a one-way ANOVA with Scheffé post-hoc test used to verify differences between sprints (p < 0.05). Pearson product-moment correlation measured the relationship between mechanical variables and free running performance. A total impulse, the rate of force development and maximum force did not show significant differences for most sprints. These three variables presented low to moderate correlations with free running performance (r between 0.01 and -0.35). Maximum and mean power presented the strongest correlations with free running performance (r = -0.71 and -0.76, respectively; p < 0.001), followed by mean force (r = -0.61; p < 0.001) and total work (r = -0.50; p < 0.001). It was concluded that under a severe work-to-rest ratio condition, power variables were better suited to evaluating repeated sprint ability than the other studied variables.
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.