Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30418963›Full record

ArticleMedicine and science in sports and exercise2019

Comparison of Exclusive Double Poling to Classic Techniques of Cross-country Skiing.

Thomas Stöggl, Olli Ohtonen, Masaki Takeda, Naoto Miyamoto, Cory Snyder, Teemu Lemmettylä, Vesa Linnamo, Stefan Josef Lindinger

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine and science in sports and exercise, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Thomas StögglDepartment of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Salzburg, Hallein/Rif, AUSTRIA.
Olli OhtonenFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, Sports Technology, University of Jyväskylä, Vuokatti, FINLAND.
Masaki TakedaFaculty of Health and Sports Science, Doshisha University, Tatara, Kyotanabe, Kyoto, JAPAN.
Naoto MiyamotoNew Industry Creation Hatchery Center, Tohoku University, Aramaki, Aoba, Sendai, Miyagi, JAPAN.
Cory SnyderDepartment of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Salzburg, Hallein/Rif, AUSTRIA.
Teemu LemmettyläFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, Sports Technology, University of Jyväskylä, Vuokatti, FINLAND.
Vesa LinnamoFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, Sports Technology, University of Jyväskylä, Vuokatti, FINLAND.
Stefan Josef LindingerDepartment of Sport and Exercise Science, University of Salzburg, Hallein/Rif, AUSTRIA.
University of Jyväskylä · FIUniversity of Salzburg · ATDoshisha University · JPTohoku University · JPUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis study aimed to 1) determine basic physiological demands during a simulated on-snow cross-country skiing (XCS) race when using grip-waxed skis (all classic XCS techniques [CLASSIC]), versus glide-waxed skis for exclusive double poling (DP) and 2) analyze in which track sections DP is different from CLASSIC under controlled gliding conditions in elite junior and senior skiers.

methodsNineteen male and female elite XC skiers performed 1) two randomized simulated XCS races over 5.3 km using DP or CLASSIC measuring section times, V˙O2, HR, blood lactate, and RPE; and 2) V˙O2peak tests using diagonal stride and DP on treadmill.

resultsThe total group showed no differences in performance or physiological responses between DP and CLASSIC. Elite male skiers achieved improved (~23 s, P < 0.05), male juniors equal (P > 0.05) and females worse (~43 s, P < 0.05) performance with DP versus CLASSIC. Flat and undulating terrain favored DP in men, whereas uphill favored CLASSIC in females (~60 s). Uphill sections showed the greatest group differences. Greater RPE was found in the arms during DP, whereas RPE was greater in the legs using CLASSIC. V˙O2peak in DP was ~95% of V˙O2max.

conclusionsMale skiers demonstrated superior performance with exclusively using DP on a Fédération International de Ski regulation-compliant XCS track, whereas junior males achieved similar, and females' weaker performance using DP versus CLASSIC. The greatest potential in females is in uphill sections where they distinctly lose time. Exclusive DP might only be beneficial in athletes with high upper-body capacity, and double-pole-specific training and technique. To generalize the findings of the current study, further analysis of snow conditions and course topography is required.

Indexed as

Sports EquipmentAdolescentAdultArmAthletic PerformanceBiomechanical PhenomenaCompetitive BehaviorFemaleHumansLegMaleMotor SkillsMuscle, SkeletalOxygen ConsumptionPerceptionPhysical Exertion

Identifiers

PMID30418963
PMCPMC6430595
OpenAlexW2899834076

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.