SynthesisSports medicine - open2021
Running Performance of Male Versus Female Players in Australian Football Matches: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Sports medicine - open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gender/Sex Entanglement, Structural Sexism, and Injury: The Case of Australian Rules Football.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025Article
- The effect of match-play on acute post-match neuromuscular fatigue following Australian Football League Women's (AFLW) competition.Biology of sport · 2025Article
- Gynaecological Health Patterns and Motherhood Experiences of Female Professional Football Players.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Determining female-specific high-intensity activity GPS thresholds in women's rugby union: Use of current use of male-derived absolute speed thresholds underestimates true levels.European journal of sport science · 2024Article
- Characterising lower-body musculoskeletal morphology and whole-body composition of elite female and male Australian Football players.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Impact of Sudden Rule Changes on Player Injuries and Performance: Insights from Australian Football.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2022Article
- Pre-season body composition has minimal influence on in-season match availability, and match performance in female Australian Football League (AFLW) players.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAustralian Football is a fast paced, intermittent sport, played by both male and female populations. The aim of this systematic review was to compare male and female Australian Football players, competing at elite and sub-elite levels, for running performance during Australian Football matches based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
methodsMedline, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science searches, using search terms inclusive of Australian Football, movement demands and microsensor technology, returned 2535 potential manuscripts, of which 33 were included in the final analyses.
resultsResults indicated that male athletes performed approximately twice the total running distances of their female counterparts, which was likely due to the differences in quarter length (male elite = 20 min, female elite = 15 min (plus time-on). When expressed relative to playing time, the differences between males and females somewhat diminished. However, high-speed running distances covered at velocities > 14.4 km·h
conclusionThese results suggest that male players should be exposed to greater training volumes, whereas training intensities should be reasonably comparable across male and female athletes.
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.