Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28966711›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of exercise science

Recovery in Level 7-10 Women's USA Artistic Gymnastics.

Stephen B Buckner, Nicholas T Bacon, Phillip A Bishop

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of exercise science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Stephen B BucknerAthletics Department, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, USA.
Nicholas T BaconDepartment of Sports Science, Belmont University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Phillip A BishopDepartment of Kinesiology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study assessed physical performance in women's artistic gymnastics following three variable recovery periods. Participants included fifteen female gymnasts (mean age = 13.5 ± 1.1) who had competed at USA Gymnastics (USAG) levels 7 - 10 within at least one year prior to the study. Each testing session consisted of a warm-up followed by four muscular endurance tests and one explosive maximal test. Assessments included pull-ups, leg lifts, handstand push-ups, vertical jump, and push-ups. After the performance assessments, the participants completed a typical practice session. The performance measures were reassessed at the beginning of each of the recovery periods of 24, 48, and 72 hours in a counterbalanced design. Performance assessments were converted into Z-scores and then averaged for a composite session Z-score. The composite session Z-scores were compared to evaluate the recovery duration. Composite Z's were significantly lower (p=0.000), after the 24 (z=-1.10) and the 48 hour (z=-0.71) recovery periods compared to baseline (z=0.00). However, there was no difference in scores (p=1.00) between the baseline and 72 hours (z=0.004) recovery. Full recovery required 72 hours under the conditions of this study.

Indexed as

performance measuresResttraining recovery

Identifiers

PMID28966711
PMCPMC5609667

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.