Trial reportLasers in medical science2024
Acute dose-response effect of photobiomodulation therapy on 5-km running performance in trained runners: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) has been advocated as a potential intervention to improve muscle performance and recovery in the health and sports context. However, the short- and long-term effects of PBMT on endurance running performance remain under-researched and controversial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the acute dose-response effect of PBMT with light-emitting diodes (LEDs) on endurance performance and rating of perceived exertion (RPE; 6-20 Borg) during a 5-km running trial in recreational runners. In a crossover design, eighteen young adult runners (28.7 ± 7.8 years) were randomized to receive 1 of 4 PBMT conditions (placebo, 300, 900, and 1260 Joules [J]) 60 min before the 5-km running trial on four occasions, separated by a 2-wk washout period. The treatments were applied to the quadriceps, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius muscles of both legs using a device containing 200 LEDs (100 red and 100 infrared). The following variables were assessed: endurance performance (i.e. total time, mean velocity, and velocity in the split distances at the initial 200 m and every 400 m lap) and RPE in the split distances at the initial 200 m and every 400 m lap. Data normality and homogeneity were tested using Shapiro-Wilk's and Levene's tests, respectively. Differences between treatment conditions were assessed using the analysis of variance tests (one- or two-way ANOVA, depending on the comparisons), complemented by the Bonferroni post hoc test. There were significant time effects for the running velocity and RPE in the split distances (p < 0.0001), with no significant treatment-by-time interaction (running velocity, p = 0.59; RPE, p = 0.95). The mean velocity (p = 0.997), total time (p = 0.998), and total mean of the RPE (p = 0.91) were similar between treatment conditions. In conclusion, acute PBMT with LEDs at doses of 300, 900, and 1260 J is not recommended for improving endurance performance and RPE in the 5-km running trial in recreational runners.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38819613What 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.