ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2025
Energy cost and game dynamics in soccer: comparing sided games and repeated sprint training.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to propose an alternative solution for determining the optimal training load to meet the high physiological demands of football, encompassing both metabolic and locomotor loads. To this end, two different formats, repetitive sprint training (RST) and sided games (SGs), were evaluated in terms of energy cost (EC), and their similarities were revealed.
methodsThe study was conducted with 21 men soccer players (age: 18.24 ± 0.63 yrs, training age: 7.24 ± 0.63 yrs, body weight: 73.01 ± 7.47 kg). RST and various-sided games (4 × 4 small-sided games and 6 × 6 medium-sided games) were played according to the rules, with goalkeeper and ball possession rules tailored to different field dimensions. Both training methods were performed separately on matchday + 4 / -3 within a weekly cycle. While all SGs work for 420 s and rest for 4 min, RST performed 720 m. with 20 s rest between bouts and 4 min between sets. EC was measured using global positioning system technology during all training sessions, considering total and equivalent running distance.
resultsThe study demonstrated that the 4v4 + Goalkeeper SSG and RST energy cost results EC cost results in similar conditioning improvement (5917.76 J/kg and 6181.00 J/kg, respectively).
conclusionAs a result of the study, 4v4 + Gk SSG showed similar results regarding energy cost with RST. Additionally, it was determined that metabolic demands increased as the number of players decreased in SGs with constant m² per player.
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.