ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Effect of six weeks of blood flow restriction combined with Tabata training on anaerobic capacity in male badminton players.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Can blood flow restriction amplify the physiological and performance benefits of interval training in male intermittent-sport athletes? a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of blood flow restriction combined with interval training on aerobic capacity, anaerobic performance, and sport-specific performance in trained male athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Blood flow restriction (BFR) combined with high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is increasingly recognized as an effective strategy for enhancing aerobic capacity and muscle strength in athletes. However, there is no consensus on the effects of BFR combined with HIIT on anaerobic capacity. Objective: This study aims to examine the effects of BFR combined with Tabata training (BFR-Tabata), a type of HIIT, on anaerobic capacity in male badminton players. Methods: Thirty male badminton players (age: 20.4 ± 1.2 years) were randomized to the BFR-Tabata group (n = 15) or the Tabata group (n = 15). Both groups performed 6 weeks (3 times per week) of Tabata training (20 s maximal effort/10 s rest x 8 sets x 4 rounds). Pre and post-intervention assessments included a 30-s Badminton-specific endurance test, countermovement jump (CMJ), squat jump (SJ), and Wingate anaerobic test (peak power [PP], average power [AP], fatigue index [FI], time to peak [TTP]). A two-way repeated measures ANOVA (time × group) was used to analyze training effects, with Bonferroni Results: The BFR-Tabata training intervention significantly improved anaerobic endurance among male badminton athletes. In comparison to the Tabata group, the BFR-Tabata group exhibited statistically significant differences in badminton-specific endurance (p = 0.02, d = 0.92, moderate effect) and multiple anaerobic performance indicators assessed by the Wingate test, including PP (p = 0.01, d = 1.11, moderate effect), AP (p < 0.01, d = 1.51, large effect), and TTP (p < 0.01, d = 2.10, very large). However, no statistically significant difference was observed in lower limb explosive strength measures, including CMJ (p = 0.50, d = 0.25, small effect), SJ (p = 0.56, d = 0.21, small effect), or during the Wingate test the FI (F = 0.138, p = 0.71, Conclusion: Blood flow restriction combined with Tabata training is an effective strategy for improving anaerobic capacity in male badminton players, but it has limited enhancement of lower-limb explosive strength.
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.