ArticleJournal of sports science & medicine2022
Reliable Peak Power Assessment During Concentric and Flexion-Extension-Cycle Based Rowing Strokes using a Non-Modified Rowing Ergometer.
Article in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- IMU-based identification of rowing conditions through supervised machine learning.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- HRV-Based Thresholds in Rowing: Validity and Reliability Assessment.European journal of sport science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurate assessment of peak rowing power is crucial for rowing-specific performance testing. Therefore, within and between day reliability of a non-modified rowing ergometer was examined. 52 trained male rowers (21.0 ± 2.9 years; 1.89 ± 0.05 m; 83.2 ± 8.2 kg; 2,000-m ergometer Time Trial mean power: 369 ± 57 W) performed (two times 4) isolated concentric rowing strokes (DRIVE) and single flexion-extension cycle (FEC-type) rowing strokes (SLIDE-DRIVE) on two separate days (1 week apart). Good to excellent intraclass correlation coefficients (0.94 ≤ ICC ≤ 1.00), low standard error of measurement (≤ 2.7%), low coefficient of variation (≤ 4.9%), and suitable level of agreements (≤ 30W) for DRIVE and SLIDE-DRIVE indicated a high level of (within and between day) reliability. In addition, SLIDE-DRIVE (423 ± 157 W) revealed remarkably higher rowing power (
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.