ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Can mechanical load and physiological intensity during gymnastics training explain physical adaptations? an observational study.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study analyzed the relationships between physiological and mechanical training loads and subsequent physical strength and aerobic adaptations in youth gymnasts. A prospective cohort design monitored 40 local-level female artistic gymnasts (16.5 ± 1.1 years) over a 12-week preparatory training phase. Strength (Isometric Mid-Thigh Pull [IMTP], Countermovement Jump [CMJ]) and aerobic fitness (Multistage Aerobic Fitness Test by Luc Léger [MSAFT]) were assessed at baseline and post-intervention. Training load was continuously monitored via heart rate (TRIMP), mechanical load (jumps), and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE). Significant improvements were observed across all fitness parameters: IMTP (19.2%), CMJ (2.7%), and MSAFT (8.6%), all with large effect sizes (p < 0.001). Mean session loads averaged RPE 7.25 ± 0.732, TRIMP 290.45 ± 30.343, and 105.18 ± 27.547 jumps. Jump volume significantly correlated with improvements in IMTP (r = 0.478, p = 0.002) and CMJ (r = 0.785, p < 0.001), indicating its large association with strength improvement. Conversely, RPE (r = 0.775, p < 0.001) and TRIMP (r = 0.872, p < 0.001) were largely correlated with enhanced aerobic fitness. This study showed that physiological training loads are important for aerobic adaptations, while mechanical loads, particularly jumps, drive strength and power improvements in youth gymnasts. Therefore, monitoring strategies that integrate both internal and external load parameters is essential for optimizing specific physical qualities in gymnasts.
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.