ArticleBMC research notes2024
Effect of low versus high balance training complexity on balance performance in male adolescents.
Article in BMC research notes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe current study aimed to determine the effects of low (i.e., balance task only) versus high (i.e., balance task combined with an additional motor task like dribbling a basketball) balance training complexity (6 weeks of training consisting of 2 × 30 min balance exercises per week) on measures of static and dynamic balance in 44 healthy male adolescents (mean age: 13.3 ± 1.6 years).
resultsIrrespective of balance training complexity, significant medium- to large-sized pretest to posttest improvements were detected for static (i.e., One-Legged Stance test, stance time [s], 0.001 < p ≤ 0.008) and dynamic (i.e., 3-m Beam Walking Backward test, steps [n], 0.001 < p ≤ 0.002; Y-Balance-Test-Lower-Quarter, reach distance [cm], 0.001 < p ≤ 0.003) balance performance. Further, in all but one comparison (i.e., stance time with eyes opened on foam ground) no group × test interactions were found. These results imply that balance training is effective to improve static and dynamic measures of balance in healthy male adolescents, but the effectiveness seems unaffected by the applied level of balance training complexity.
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.