Trial reportScientific reports2024
Countermovement jump and reactive strength index of artistic gymnasts improve more with cluster-based plyometric training than with traditional methods.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07640724 (Acute Effects of Cluster-Set vs. Traditional-Set Plyometric Loading on Countermovement Jump and Reactive Strength Index in Young Tennis Players), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
Acute Effects of Cluster-Set vs. Traditional-Set Plyometric Loading on Countermovement Jump and Reactive Strength Index in Young Tennis Players
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationship Between Phase Angle Assessed by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis and Jumping Performance in Rhythmic Gymnasts: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Study.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Biomechanical analysis of the tucked front somersault on vault among elite junior female gymnasts.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development of Lower-Limb Power Across Age and Sex in Junior and Elite Artistic Gymnasts.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Article
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
Purpose This randomized controlled study aims to compare the effects of cluster training versus traditional plyometric lower limb training on vertical and horizontal jump performance, as well as the reactive strength index, in young female artistic gymnasts.
methodsA total of 54 female artistic gymnasts (15.4 ± 1.2 years) participated voluntarily this study. Participants were assigned to one of three groups: (i) cluster training (PLYct); (ii) traditional training (PLYtr); and (iii) a control group (not exposed to plyometric training). The intervention spanned 8 weeks, with evaluations conducted before and after the intervention period for the following variables: (i) squat jump; (ii) countermovement jump; and (iii) reactive strength index in a drop jump test.
resultsSignificant interactions time × group were found in SJ (p < 0.001; =0.505), CMJ (p<0.001; =0.241) and RSI (p < 0.001; =0.492). The time × group analysis in post-intervention revealed significantly greater performance in SJ of PLYct (3.0 cm; p < 0.001) and PLYtr (2.5 cm; p=0.001) in comparison to control group. Significantly higher CMJ height were observed for the PLYct group comparing to PLYtr (1.3 cm; p=0.008) and control (2.9 cm; <0.001), while PLYtr was significantly better than control (1.6 cm; p=0.001). PLYct had significantly greater RSI than PLYtr (0.07 RSI; p = 0.014) and control (0.10 RSI; p<0.001), while PLYtr was significantly better than control (0.10 RSI; p = 0.024).
conclusionCluster sets were significantly more effective than traditional sets in improving the stretch-shortening cycle as measured by the CMJ and enhancing the reactive strength of gymnasts. It is recommended to incorporate cluster sets while applying plyometric training to maximize performance with favorable adaptations.
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.