Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38760471›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Anthropometric and physiological profiles of highly trained sailors in various positions and levels.

Dandan Pan, Kaiyang Sun, Xiuxia Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Dandan PanShanghai Elite Sport Training Administrative Center, Shanghai, 202162, China.
Kaiyang SunShanghai Research Institute of Sports Science, Shanghai, 200030, China. sunkaiyang@shriss.cn.
Xiuxia LiuXiamen University, Amoy, 361005, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze anthropometric and physiological profiles of highly trained sailors and the differences between sailors regarding various training levels. Forty-two sailors (22 male, 22.4 ± 3.8 years; 20 females, 21.3 ± 3.6 years) were divided into helmsmen and crew groups, and the high- and low-level were distinguished. Sailors completed height, sitting height, legs length, weight, BMI, VO2max, 30 s all-out sprint, isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP), countermovement jump, bench pull, core endurance tests. The results showed the crew had higher height, sitting height, weight, VO2max and lower trunk flexor endurance test times compared to the helmsmen (p < 0.05). The helmsmen had higher relative peak power/force in the 30 s all-out sprint and IMTP tests compared to the crew, whereas the crew had better absolute strength in bench pull, with significant differences between female sailors (p < 0.05). The high-level sailors showed more sailing experience than low-level sailors (p < 0.05). In conclusion, highly trained crew tend to be taller and heavier, while helmsmen have better trunk flexor endurance. For female sailors, helmsmen have better lower-body power and strength and crew have better upper-body strength. Sailing experience is a reliable variable to distinguish sailors' levels. The specific anthropometric and physiological profiles of sailors in various positions can assist sailing coaches in athlete selection and intervention training.

Indexed as

AnthropometryPhysical EnduranceAdultBody WeightFemaleHumansMaleMilitary PersonnelMuscle StrengthOxygen ConsumptionShipsWater SportsYoung AdultAnthropometric profilesCrewHelmsmanPhysiological profilesSailors

Identifiers

PMID38760471
PMCPMC11101428

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.