ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2021
The Immediate Effects of Expert and Dyad External Focus Feedback on Drop Landing Biomechanics in Female Athletes: An Instrumented Field Study.
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Training interventions to reduce the risk of injury to the lower extremity joints during landing movements in adult athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Psychometric properties comparison of EQ-5D-Y-3L and CHU-9D in children with adenoid hypertrophy.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Individualized Technique Feedback for Instant Technique Improvements and Knee Abduction Moment Reductions - A New Approach for 'Sidestepping' ACL Injuries?International journal of sports physical therapy · 2024Article
- Effects of perceptual-cognitive tasks on inter-joint coordination of soccer players and ordinary college students.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Altered trunk and lower extremity movement coordination after neuromuscular training with and without external focus instruction: a randomized controlled trial.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Effective Attentional Focus Strategies after Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Commentary.International journal of sports physical therapy · 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
backgroundAnterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) injury prevention interventions have used trained experts to ensure quality feedback. Dyad (peer) feedback may be a more cost-effective method to deliver feedback to athletes. PURPOSE: To determine the immediate effects of dyad versus expert feedback on drop landing kinematics and kinetics in female athletes. STUDY
designCohort study.
settingCollege gymnasium.
methodsTwo teams (one female basketball and one female volleyball), from a local college, were team randomized to dyad feedback (volleyball team) or expert feedback (basketball team) (13 expert, 19±0.87years, 1.7±0.09m, 68.04±7.21kg) (10 dyad 19.4±1.07years, 1.73±0.08m, 72.18±11.23kg). Participants completed drop vertical jumps at two different time points (pre- and post-feedback). Knee flexion and abduction displacement were assessed with Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) and vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) was assessed with a force plate during the landing phase of the drop vertical jump and compared across groups and condition (pre- and post-feedback) with a repeated measures ANCOVA
resultsThere were no significant differences between groups for flexion displacement. There was a significant change pre- to post- (decrease 4.65˚ p=0.01) in abduction displacement, with no group effect. There was a significant interaction of group by condition (p=0.01) for vGRF with no difference between groups before feedback (p>0.05). Between groups there was a decrease of vGRF in the expert group (difference 0.45 N*bw-1, p=0.01) at post-feedback relative to dyad. Within the expert group there was a significant difference between pre- and post-feedback (difference 0.72 N*bw-1, p=0.01), while the dyad group did not change pre- to post-feedback (difference 0.18 N*bw-1, p=0.67).
conclusionMovement screening experts giving real-time feedback were successful in improving key injury-risk kinematics and kinetics in female athletes, while dyad feedback only improved kinematics, indicating that expert feedback may be needed to ensure changes in kinematics and kinetics. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33604139PMC7872449What 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.