Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27052972›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2016

Velocity, aerobic power and metabolic cost of whole body and arms only front crawl swimming at various stroke rates.

Kirstin S Morris, Mark A Osborne, Megan E Shephard, Tina L Skinner, David G Jenkins

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The energy cost of swimming and its determinants.European journal of applied physiology · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Kirstin S MorrisSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences (#26B), The University of Queensland (St. Lucia Campus), Cnr Blair Drive and Union Drive, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia. kirstin.morris@uqconnect.edu.au.
Mark A OsborneSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences (#26B), The University of Queensland (St. Lucia Campus), Cnr Blair Drive and Union Drive, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Megan E ShephardSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences (#26B), The University of Queensland (St. Lucia Campus), Cnr Blair Drive and Union Drive, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Tina L SkinnerSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences (#26B), The University of Queensland (St. Lucia Campus), Cnr Blair Drive and Union Drive, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
David G JenkinsSchool of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences (#26B), The University of Queensland (St. Lucia Campus), Cnr Blair Drive and Union Drive, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeStroke rate (SR) has not been considered in previous research examining the relative roles of the limbs in front-crawl performance. This study compared velocity, aerobic power ([Formula: see text]) and metabolic cost (C) between whole body (WB) and arms only (AO) front-crawl swimming across various intensities while controlling SR.

methodsTwenty Australian national swimmers performed six 200 m front-crawl efforts under two conditions: (1) WB swimming and, (2) AO swimming. Participants completed the 200 m trials under three SR conditions: "low" (22-26 stroke-cycles min(-1)), "moderate" (30-34 stroke-cycles min(-1) and "high" (38-42 stroke-cycles min(-1)). [Formula: see text] was continuously measured, with C, velocity, SR, and kick rate calculated for each effort.

resultsRegardless of the SR condition and sex, AO velocity was consistently lower than WB velocity by ~11.0 % (p < 0.01). AO [Formula: see text] was lower than WB [Formula: see text] at all SR conditions for females (p < 0.01) and at the "high" SR for males (p < 0.01). C did not differ between WB and AO at any SR for both sexes (p > 0.01). When C was expressed as a function of velocity, WB and AO regression equations differed for males (p = 0.01) but not for females (p = 0.087). Kick rate increased as SR increased (p < 0.01), though the kick-to-stroke rate ratio remained constant.

conclusionElite swimmers gain ~11 % in velocity from their kick and, when used in conjunction with the arm stroke at the swimmers' preferred frequency, the metabolic cost of WB and AO swimming is the same. Coaches should consider these results when prescribing AO sets if their intention is to reduce the metabolic load.

Indexed as

AdultArmAustraliaBiomechanical PhenomenaExerciseFemaleHumansMalePsychomotor PerformanceSwimmingYoung AdultKick rateMetabolic costOxygen uptakeSwimmingUpper limbsVelocity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.