ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2025
Biomechanics of landing in gymnasts: a scoping review.
Review in Frontiers in sports and active living, 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.
- Physical fitness and training factors associated with injury risk in aerobic gymnastics: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Biomechanics of landing in gymnasts: a scoping review.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Review
- The effects of an 8-week French Contrast Training program on lower limb strength and power in elite martial arts athletes.Frontiers in sports and active living · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This scoping review aimed to map methodologies used to assess landing biomechanics in gymnasts, focusing on muscle function and stability. Four research questions were formed, addressing common methodological approaches, factors affecting stability, and the relationships between muscle function, strength, and stability during landing. The searches were conducted across six databases and supplemented by reference and forward citation searches. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing 212 participants aged 8-25 years, predominantly competitive gymnasts. The studies revealed significant variability in methods for assessing postural stabilization and muscle function during landing. Stabilization was evaluated using time to stabilization and center of pressure metrics, while muscle activity was predominantly measured via surface electromyography, focusing on lower limb muscles. Factors such as drop height, age, training level, and task-specific demands influenced muscle activity patterns but were inconsistently reported. Gymnasts demonstrated superior neuromuscular control compared to untrained individuals, with distinct muscle activation patterns during landing phases. Despite these insights, no studies examined the interplay between muscle strength, activity, and stabilization metrics. The lack of standardized methodologies limits direct comparisons and generalizations. This review highlights the need for consistent protocols and further research to explore relationships between muscle function, stability metrics, and performance outcomes in gymnastics.
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.