ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020
Lacrosse Athletes Load and Recovery Monitoring: Comparison between Objective and Subjective Methods.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Sub-Elite Youth Football Players: Predicting Recovery Through Machine Learning Integration of Physical, Technical, Tactical and Maturational Data.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Implementing Meta-Session Autoregulation Strategies for Exercise - A Scoping Review.International journal of exercise science · 2024Article
- Performance of Professional Soccer Players before and after COVID-19 Infection; Observational Study with an Emphasis on Graduated Return to Play.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Observational
- Investigation of readiness and perceived workload in junior female basketball players during a congested match schedule.Biology of sport · 2021Article
- Epidemiology of Injuries in National Collegiate Athletic Association Men's Lacrosse: 2014-2015 Through 2018-2019.Journal of athletic training · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Both objective (OM) and subjective (SM) methods are used in athletic studies, regardless of sport type, to identify and analyze load and recovery status of athletes. As little information exists about the comparison of these two methodologies, the aim of this study is to compare and contrast information that defines the relationship between both methods. Twelve international male lacrosse athletes participated in this study over the course of which participants heart-rate-variability and questionnaire-data were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to evaluate changes over time and correlations between used methods. Comparison between baseline values and competition showed a reduction in root-mean-square of successive differences (RMSSD) (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.