SynthesisPloS one2025
Immediate and short-term effects of neurodynamic techniques on hamstring flexibility: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07645014 (Comparative Effects of Neurodynamic Stretch and Myofascial Pain Release in Dysmenorrhea, Quality Of Sleep And Stress In Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome.), 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.
Comparative Effects of Neurodynamic Stretch and Myofascial Pain Release in Dysmenorrhea, Quality Of Sleep And Stress In Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Technique-specific reduction of sciatic nerve stiffness through neurodynamic stretches at submaximal and maximal intensity in asymptomatic individuals.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Trial
- Passive vs. active warm-up combined with stretching on hamstring flexibility and maximal voluntary contractions.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Effects of lower limb neural mobilisation on reactive agility, balance, and physical performance: a randomised controlled trial.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGood hamstring flexibility(HF) is crucial for sports performance and health, with injuries having an economic impact on healthcare and sports teams. Therefore, our objectives were to estimate the effect of neurodynamic techniques on HF and to compare the effect of these techniques with static stretching.
methodsWe systematically searched the Cochrane, MEDLINE(via PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science and Sportdiscus databases for RCTs comparing neurodynamic interventions with control intervention or with static stretching exercises for HF in adults with limited HF. We conducted a random-effects meta-analysis with subgroup analyses according to the type of comparison group(control group or static stretching exercises) and total number of sessions. Furthermore, to reflect the variation in genuine therapy effects in different scenarios, including future patients, we calculated a 95% prediction interval(prI).
resultsThirteen trials were included, involving 624 participants. Pooled results showed a significant improvement in HF for immediate (SMD = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.59) and short-term effects (SMD = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.52). Subgroup analyses by type of comparison group showed that these techniques are more effective than the control group in the immediate and short term and than static stretching in the short term. Analyses by total sessions showed a significant increase in HF with a treatment of 1, 3, 10 and 12 sessions.
conclusionNeurodynamic techniques improve HF immediately and in the short term. Subgroup analyses by type of comparison group showed that these techniques are more effective than static stretching in the short term.
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.