Trial reportScientific reports2024
Effect of different neuromuscular training modalities on postural stability in healthy recreation people: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unstable trunk core strength training improves shooting performance and holding stability in elite 10 m air pistol athletes: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Feasibility and Biomechanical Effects of Dynamic Neuromuscular Stabilization Training During Stair Negotiation in Middle-Aged Women with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the effects of dynamic neuromuscular stabilization (DNS), whole-body vibration (WBV), and a combination of DNS and WBV (MIX) training modalities on postural stability (PS) in healthy recreation participants. The 179 participants (age 24.02 ± 2.07 years) were divided into the gender-balanced groups: MIX (n = 47), DNS (n = 45), WBV (n = 44), and control group (CONTROL, n = 43) and underwent two months treatment. The single and double-leg Center of Force (COF) parameters were collected. A 2 × 4 mixed-design analysis of covariances captured no changes from initial to final testing in all PS measures of WBV and CONTROL (p ≥ 0.30) and indicated trivial improvements (mean Hedge's g) within the groups of the most PS measures (g≥-0.42, p ≤ 0.001). However, we noticed medium to large MIX and DNS improvements in left-leg COF (MIX: g ≤ 2.11; DNS: g ≤ 1.74) and double-leg COF (MIX: g ≤ 2.49; DNS: g ≤ 1.23). Contrast analysis further confirmed that MIX and DNS improved PS measures more than WBV and CONTROLS while showing higher improvements of MIX than DNS (mean difference in changes [95% Confidence Intervals]) in left-leg for 1.16 mm [0.37 mm, 1.95 mm] and double-leg COF for 0.67 mm [0.85 mm, 0.49 mm]. Combined DNS and WBV modalities expressed higher improvements in PS measures than single modalities and controls. However, further research is warranted to clarify the differences in DNS, WBV, and combined intervention effects on PS measures.
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.