ArticlePloS one2025
Impact of on-field repeated sprint training on aerobic fitness and anaerobic performance in football athletes: A matched-pair design.
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 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effects of repeated sprint training on repeated sprint ability and short-distance sprint performance in youth soccer players: a meta-analysis.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- The Effects of Different Dietary and Glycogen-Loaded Two-a-Day Training Approaches on Muscle Damage and Inflammatory Markers for Enhancing Metabolic Efficiency.Metabolites · 2026Article
- Associations Between Nutrition Knowledge, Body Composition, and Cardiopulmonary Exercise Performance in Adolescent Football Players.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRepeated sprint ability (RSA) is essential for football performance, especially in maintaining high-intensity efforts throughout a match. Repeated sprint training (RST) improves both aerobic and anaerobic capacities; however, its effects on players in different positional roles remain underexplored, particularly with regard to tailored conditioning protocols.
objectiveThis study assessed the impact of on-field RST on physical performance metrics, including aerobic capacity (VO₂max), sprint speed (10m DASH), vertical jump height (VJH), and power output, with a focus on positional differences among forwards, defenders, and goalkeepers.
methodsForty male football players (aged 18-25 years) were purposively sampled and matched by position before allocation into experimental (RST) and control groups. The experimental group completed a structured four-week RST program, while the control group continued routine football training involving technical, tactical, and endurance drills. Pre- and post-intervention assessments included the Cooper Test (aerobic capacity), VO₂max, VJH, power output, and 10m DASH.
resultsAfter 4 weeks of RST, significant mprovements were observed in the experimental group. VO2max increased by 4.4 ml/kg/min (95% CI: 2.9 to 6.0; p < 0.001, d = 1.31), and 10m sprint time decreased by 0.32 seconds (95% CI: -0.45 to -0.19; p < 0.001, d = 1.36) in forwards. VJH improved significantly (p < 0.001) among defenders (Δ = 3.44 cm, 95% CI: 1.76 to 5.12, d = 1.06), while power improvements were most notable in defenders (Δ = 43.44W, 95% CI: 28.62 to 58.26, d = 1.00). Goalkeepers showed modest, non-significant improvements. Significant positional differences were identified for VJH and power output (p < 0.001).
conclusionRST significantly enhanced physical performance metrics, particularly for forwards and defenders. The findings emphasize the importance of positional specificity in training programs to optimize football performance.
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.