ArticleJournal of sports science & medicine2025
Using Inertial Measurement Units to Quantify External Load in Men's Singles Badminton Matches: Insights from Set Outcomes and Score Gaps.
Article in Journal of sports science & medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantifying external load using kinematic variables from inertial devices provides crucial insights into player performance. This study analyzed load variables in men's singles badminton matches, differentiating between set outcomes (winners vs. losers) across different score gaps (0-5, 6-10, >10 points). Data were collected from 18 highly trained players (110 sets) using the Catapult Vector S7 microtechnology units, housed with a 100hz accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer. The results indicated that set winners exhibited a lower player load (estimated difference [ED] and 95% CI = -14.1 [-26.20, -1.78], p = 0.023), covered less distance (ED = -134.84 [-248.99, -17.01], p = 0.02), performed fewer explosive efforts (defined as the sum of high-intensity accelerations, decelerations, and changes of direction [COD]) (ED = -19.75 [-31.85, -7.33], p = 0.002), CODs (ED = -21.02 [-34.18, -7.67], p = 0.003), and accelerations (ED = -7.03 [-13.16, -0.73], p = 0.03) than set losers. Notably, when the score gap was narrow (0-5 points), set winners performed more explosive efforts and CODs than set losers (adjusted p = 0.0412 and 0.0499, respectively). However, as the score gap widened (6-10 and >10 points), set winners exhibited fewer explosive efforts and CODs (all adjusted p < 0.05). Furthermore, when the score gap exceeded 10 points, set winners demonstrated a lower player load, covered less distance, and performed fewer right-side CODs (all adjusted p < 0.05). These findings suggest that winners generally have a lower external load in men's singles badminton matches. However, when opponents are evenly matched, on-court movement may play a pivotal role in determining the outcome.
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.