ArticlePloS one2021
The value of technical characteristics for future performance in youth tennis players: A prospective study.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Multidimensional and Longitudinal Approaches in Talent Identification and Development in Racket Sports: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine - open · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Data-Driven Multidimensional Performance Profiling in U10 Tennis Players.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Effects of a 6-week on-court training program on the International Tennis Number (ITN) and a range of physical fitness characteristics in young tennis players.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Technical skills in complex tennis situations: Dutch talented players U15 compared to players U17.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Article
- Effects of athletic training on physical fitness and stroke velocity in healthy youth and adult tennis players: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Review
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
The aim of this study is to examine whether technical characteristics predict current and future tennis performance of youth tennis players. Twenty-nine male youth tennis players (age 13.40 ± .51) were assessed on anthropometrical characteristics (height, weight, maturity status) and technical characteristics (ball speed, accuracy and percentage errors) using an on-court tennis test when they were under-14 (U14). Game situations were simulated, which were either fixed or variable. The variable game situations required players to consider the direction of the ball, as opposed to the fixed game situations where players needed to play every ball to the same side. Players' tennis ratings were obtained U14 ('current performance') and under-18 (U18) ('future performance'). According to their rating U18 players were classified as future elite (n = 9) or future competitive (n = 20). A multiple linear regression analysis showed that ball speed and accuracy were significant predictors of current and future performance (p < .001), with R2 of .595 and .463, respectively. When controlling for age, a one-way MANCOVA revealed that future elite players were more accurate than future competitive players (p = .048, 95% CI [.000 to .489]), especially in variable compared to fixed game situations (p < .05). In conclusion, the current study is the first to show that technical characteristics are crucial for current as well as future performance in youth male tennis players. Findings of this prospective study provide essential information to coaches about characteristics that require most attention in performance development in youth players.
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.