ArticlePloS one2024
A comparative analysis of weekly internal and external workloads between starting and non-starting professional soccer players: A retrospective 21-week examination.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAims of the present investigation encompassed: (i) the quantification of training and match loads experienced by starters and non-starters within a professional soccer team; (ii) the identification of variations in these loads across different training modalities, namely, Preparation Training (PT), Match and Match Compensation Training (M&MCT), and their cumulative sum (Total Load; TL); and (iii) the formulation of guidelines aimed at harmonizing the weekly workloads between the groups.
methodsInternal and external load of training sessions (n = 97), competitive matches (n = 21) and running based sessions (n = 4) were recorded for 21 weeks to investigate possible heterogeneity between starters and non-starters across PT, M&MCT and TL.
resultsDuring PT, time spent in heart rate zone 5 (HRZ5) was increased for non-starters (+46.1%). During M&MCT, lower loads for non-starters were found in the rate of perceived exertion (sRPE) (-45.6%), HRZ4 (-54%) and HRZ5 (-77.8%), total distance (TD) (-37%), number of sprints (-58.1%), distance in speed zone 1 (-51.1%), zone 3 (-61.5%) and zone 4 (-59.8%) (SZ1, SZ3&4) and all acceleration and deceleration zones (Acc1-4; Dec1-4) (Acc1: -53.1%; Acc2: -56.3%; Acc3: -59.2%; Acc4: 57.8%) (Dec1: -45.9%; Dec2: -55.2%; Dec3: -63.2%; Dec4: -67.7%). Regarding TL, the non-starters' loads remain lower compared to starters for sRPE (-19.2%), HRZ4 (-21.6%) and HRZ5 (-41.4%), number of sprints (-26.7%), SZ3 (-34.2%), Acc3 (-24.4%), Acc4 (-26.1%), Dec2 (-18.7%), Dec3 (-24%) and Dec4 (-31.2%).
conclusionsBy implementing a running-based regimen on matchday and MCT the day after (MD+1), TD, distances in SZ1, SZ2, SZ4, SZ5, and counts of accelerations in Acc1&2, as well as Dec1, were effectively replicated for non-starters. All other variables remained unaligned for the non-starters. Given the prevalent emphasis on Small-Sided Games (SSGs) during MCT at MD+1, the incorporation of an additional running-based session for non-starters on MD is advised to address gaps in TD, sprint counts, and high-intensity load variables, such as HRZ4&5 and SZ 3 to 5.
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.