Observational studyInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022
Analysis of Successful Behaviors Leading to Groundwork Scoring Skills in Elite Judo Athletes.
Observational study in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Kinematic Analysis of the Lower Limb in Uchi-Mata: Comparison Between Elite Athletes Specializing and Non-Specializing.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Effective transition from standing to groundwork combat: an analysis of judo athletes with visual impairments.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
- Effects of weight divisions in time-motion of female high-level Brazilian Jiu-jitsu combat behaviors.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Which Performance Tests Best Define the Special Judo Fitness Test Classification in Elite Judo Athletes?Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed (1) to propose an approach of observational analysis of the preceding standing judo (tachi-waza (TW)) context to a groundwork (ne-waza (NW)) grappling score (NWGS), and (2) to analyze the outcomes of applying such a model in high-level judoists. We conducted an observational analysis of 176 NW scoring actions of 794 combats observed in Baku's World Judo Championships of 2018. Women scored more NWGS, performing more corporal controls but less segmental controls compared with the men. Moreover, NWGS were scored predominately during the second and third minutes of combat, independently of the sex or the weight category. Most NWGS occurred after an asymmetrical lateral structure, without showing associations with a particular type of NWGS. The movement structure of the attacking action during TW leading to an NWGS was predominantly techniques without turn, followed closely by techniques with turn, and barely performed after supine position techniques. Data showed that NWGS occurred more frequently after a failed TW attack (68.6%) than after a scored TW attack (31.4%). The TW attacker achieved NWGS with a higher frequency (62%) than the TW defender (38%), who mainly took advantage of a failed TW attack (98.5% vs. 1.5%, after failed vs. scored TW, respectively). The grip configurations most frequently employed during TW were dorsal-sleeve and flap-sleeve; overall, frontal grips were predominant over dorsal grips. However, no specific TW grip was related to success or grip progression before an NWGS. Our results will help judo coaches understand the influence of these factors on judo performance and optimize the planning and execution of technical-tactical content.
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.