ArticlePloS one2025
Comparison of intra-session reliability of force-velocity-power variables between a horizontal dynamic leg press device and vertical jump tests.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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 study aimed to compare the intra-session reliability of force-velocity-power variables obtained from a horizontal dynamic leg press device (HDLPD) and vertical jump tests. Nineteen male field hockey players performed maximal leg extension movements in HDLPD under a wide range of available load conditions (100, 120, 140, 160, 180, and 200% body weight [BW]), followed by squat jumps (SJ) and countermovement jumps (CMJ) under unloaded (0 kg), moderate- (22.0 ± 4.6 kg), and high-loaded (43.9 ± 9.2 kg) conditions. The peak and mean values of force, velocity, and power derived from the HDLPD, SJ, and CMJ were calculated. The HDLPD showed acceptable intrasession reliability for all experimental outcomes (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.845 to 0.974, coefficient of variation [CV] = 0.43% to 4.52%). The outcome variables during SJ and CMJ had acceptable intra-session reliability, except for the relative reliability of some variables (ICC = 0.588-0.973, CV = 1.19%-8.38%). The results of this study showed that the HDLPD has high intrasession reliability in measuring force-velocity-power variables for maximal leg extension performance. In addition, for some force-velocity-power variables, HDLPD can provide more reliable measurements than vertical jumps. Therefore, the HDLPD can be useful for practitioners who want to reliably measure leg extension strength, speed, and power outcomes.
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.