Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28713467›Full record

ArticleJournal of human kinetics2017

Quality versus Quantity Debate in Swimming: Perceptions and Training Practices of Expert Swimming Coaches.

Frank J Nugent, Thomas M Comyns, Giles D Warrington

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Pandemic-Induced Reductions on Swim Training Volume and Performance in Collegiate Swimmers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Frank J NugentDepartment of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Thomas M ComynsDepartment of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.
Giles D WarringtonDepartment of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The debate over low-volume, high-intensity training versus high-volume, low-intensity training, commonly known as Quality versus Quantity, respectively, is a frequent topic of discussion among swimming coaches and academics. The aim of this study was to explore expert coaches' perceptions of quality and quantity coaching philosophies in competitive swimming and to investigate their current training practices. A purposeful sample of 11 expert swimming coaches was recruited for this study. The study was a mixed methods design and involved each coach participating in 1 semi-structured interview and completing 1 closed-ended questionnaire. The main findings of this study were that coaches felt quality training programmes would lead to short term results for youth swimmers, but were in many cases more appropriate for senior swimmers. The coaches suggested that quantity training programmes built an aerobic base for youth swimmers, promoted technical development through a focus on slower swimming and helped to enhance recovery from training or competition. However, the coaches continuously suggested that quantity training programmes must be performed with good technique and they felt this was a misunderstood element. This study was a critical step towards gaining a richer and broader understanding on the debate over Quality versus Quantity training from an expert swimming coaches' perspective which was not currently available in the research literature.

Indexed as

coaching philosophyhigh-intensity traininghigh-volume traininglong term athlete developmentmixed methods

Identifiers

PMID28713467
PMCPMC5504587

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.