Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37250711›Full record

Trial reportPeerJ2023

Effects of

Michał Zwierko, Wojciech Jedziniak, Marek Popowczak, Andrzej Rokita

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Light-based manipulation of visual processing speed during soccer-specific training has a positive impact on visual and visuomotor abilities in professional soccer players.Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Michał ZwierkoDepartment of Team Sports Games, Wroclaw University of Health and Sport Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-5339-7959
Wojciech JedziniakInstitute of Physical Culture Sciences, University of Szczecin, Szczecin, Poland.ORCID 0000-0001-9789-0940
Marek PopowczakDepartment of Team Sports Games, Wroclaw University of Health and Sport Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-3895-6206
Andrzej RokitaDepartment of Team Sports Games, Wroclaw University of Health and Sport Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Stroboscopic training is based on an exercise with intermittent visual stimuli that force a greater demand on the visuomotor processing for improving performance under normal vision. While the stroboscopic effect is used as an effective tool to improve information processing in general perceptual-cognitive tasks, there is still a lack of research focused on identifying training protocols for sport-specific settings. Therefore, we aimed at assessing the effects of Methods: Fifty young volleyball athletes (26 males and 24 females; mean age, 16.5 ± 0.6 years) participated in this study and were each divided randomly into an experimental group and a control group, who then both performed identical volleyball-specific tasks, with the experimental group under stroboscopic influence. The participants were evaluated three times using laboratory based tests for simple and complex reaction speed, sensory sensitivity and saccade dynamics; before the after the 6-week-long training (short-term effect) and 4 weeks later (long-term effect). In addition, a field test investigated the effects of the training on reactive agility. Results: A significant TIME Conclusions: There was a larger effectiveness from the 6-week volleyball-specific training in the stroboscopic group compared to the non-stroboscopic group. The stroboscopic training resulted in significant improvements on most measures (three of five) of visual and visuomotor function with more marked enhancement in visuomotor than in sensory processing. Also, the stroboscopic intervention improved reactive agility, with more pronounced performance gains for short-term compared to the long-term changes. Gender differences in response to the stroboscopic training are inconclusive, therefore our findings do not offer a clear consensus.

Indexed as

VolleyballAdolescentAthletesCognitionExerciseFemaleHumansMaleReaction TimeAgilityReaction timeStroboscopic eyewearTeam sportsVisual training

Identifiers

PMID37250711
PMCPMC10211363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.