ArticlePloS one2025
Sex and pressure effects of foam rolling on acute range of motion in the hamstring muscles.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Immediate Biomechanical Effects of Manual and Tool-Assisted Myofascial Release on the Erector Spinae Muscle.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Trial
- Effects of foam rolling and the knowledge-to-action gap: are practitioners' beliefs supported by the evidence? An international survey study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between Attitude Toward Pain and the Effects of Foam Rolling on Biomechanical Parameters of Soft Tissues Measured with the MyotonPRO Device.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of Foam Roller, and Massage Ball with and Without Vibration on Squat Load-Velocity Profile of Resistance Trained Adults.Journal of sports science & medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of pressure levels and sex on acute range of motion (ROM) changes during foam rolling (FR) using a soccer ball. Twenty collegiate athletes (10 males, 10 females) performed FR on their hamstrings at low (15-25% body weight) or high (45-55%) pressure levels for 2 minutes. ROM was assessed through passive straight leg raise (PSLR) and passive knee extension (PKE) tests before, immediately after, and 10 minutes post-intervention. Results showed that FR significantly improved hip and knee ROM across all conditions, with benefits persisting for at least 10 minutes. No notable differences were observed between pressure levels, and sex did not affect the magnitude of improvement. Perceived pain during FR did not significantly influence ROM outcomes. These findings demonstrate that FR using a simple tool like a soccer ball is beneficial for improving ROM in both males and females, regardless of pressure intensity. This suggests that FR provides a practical, accessible method for improving ROM in athletes and other populations.
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.