Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31523305›Full record

ArticleJournal of human kinetics2019

Force-Velocity Relationship in the Countermovement Jump Exercise Assessed by Different Measurement Methods.

Amador García-Ramos, Alejandro Pérez-Castilla, Antonio J Morales-Artacho, Filipa Almeida, Paulino Padial, Juan Bonitch-Góngora, Blanca de la Fuente, Belén Feriche

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of human kinetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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.

Amador García-RamosDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Alejandro Pérez-CastillaDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Antonio J Morales-ArtachoDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Filipa AlmeidaDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Paulino PadialDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Juan Bonitch-GóngoraDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Blanca de la FuenteSpanish Sport Council, Sierra Nevada Training Centre, Granada, Spain.
Belén FericheDepartment of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to compare force, velocity, and power output collected under different loads, as well as the force-velocity (F-V) relationship between three measurement methods. Thirteen male judokas were tested under four loading conditions (20, 40, 60, and 80 kg) in the countermovement jump (CMJ) exercise, while mechanical output data were collected by three measurement methods: the Samozino's method (SAM), a force platform (FP), and a linear velocity transducer (LVT). The variables of the linear F-V relationship (maximum force [F0], maximum velocity [V0], F-V slope, and maximum power [P0]) were determined. The results revealed that (1) the LVT overestimated the mechanical output as compared to the SAM and FP methods, especially under light loading conditions, (2) the SAM provided the lowest magnitude for all mechanical output, (3) the F-V relationships were highly linear either for the SAM (r = 0.99), FP (r = 0.97), and LVT (r = 0.96) methods, (4) the F-V slope obtained by the LVT differed with respect to the other methods due to a larger V0 (5.28 ± 1.48 m·s-1) compared to the SAM (2.98 ± 0.64 m·s-1) and FP (3.06 ± 0.42 m·s-1), and (5) the methods were significantly correlated for F0 and P0, but not for V0 or F-V slope. These results only support the accuracy of the SAM and FP to determine the F-V relationship during the CMJ exercise. The very large correlations of the SAM and LVT methods with respect to the FP (presumed gold-standard) for the mean values of force, velocity and power support their concurrent validity for the assessment of mechanical output under individual loads.

Indexed as

force platformlinear velocity transducerSamozino's methodvertical jump

Identifiers

PMID31523305
PMCPMC6714365

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.