ArticleAmerican journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation2025
Combined Strength of Standardized Lab Sprint Testing and Wheelchair Mobility Field Testing in Wheelchair Tennis Players.
Article in American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation, 2025. 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.
- Performance, Biomechanical Demands, Injury Burden, and Health Surveillance in Wheelchair Court Sports and Selected Para Sport Cohorts: A Systematic Review.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Trunk function: the core of mobility performance in wheelchair tennis.Frontiers in sports and active living · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis cross-sectional study examined associations between wheelchair sprint and anaerobic power (measured in the lab) and wheelchair mobility performance (measured in the field) among two groups of wheelchair tennis players. Additionally, construct validity was assessed for both lab and field tests.
designNine amateur and nine elite wheelchair tennis players performed a Sprint and Wingate test on a wheelchair ergometer in the lab and a Sprint, Illinois, and Spider test in the field, with inertial measurement units on their wheelchairs. Associations were assessed using regression analyses, and construct validity was assessed with an independent t test (elite vs. amateur).
resultsThe strongest associations were observed between lab outcomes and field sprint power (R 2 > 90%), followed by peak linear velocity and test duration (R 2 = 77%-85%), while peak rotational velocity showed the lowest associations with lab outcomes (R 2 = 69%-80%). The elite group outperformed the amateur group on all test outcomes.
conclusionsDespite differences in lab- and field-testing methodologies (e.g., trunk influence, linear/rotational components), the strong associations indicate overlap in measured constructs. Field testing offers valuable insight into practical performance, whereas lab testing enables in-depth biomechanical and physiological analyses. All tests effectively discriminate between elite and amateur wheelchair tennis players.
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.