ArticleScientific reports2025
The role of stretching protocols in post-fatigue performance and flexibility among soccer players.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- How long should athletes with high range of motion demands stretch? Acute stretching durations for flexibility and performance: a systematic review.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Validations and applications of markerless motion capture using OpenCap: a scoping review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Pooled it
- Acute effects of plyometric-dynamic stretching sequencing on athletic and neuromuscular performance in soccer players: a randomized crossover trial.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Associations among age, playing position, dribbling, agility, and passing skills in elite youth football players graduating from a high-performance academy: an observational study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
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
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of static stretching (SS), slow dynamic stretching (SDS), and fast dynamic stretching (FDS) on restoring flexibility, balance, and performance following soccer-specific fatigue. Forty male soccer players (age: 21.0 ± 2.4 years) completed the study. Participants performed a soccer-specific fatigue protocol followed by one of four conditions (SS, SDS at 50 bpm, FDS at 100 bpm, and a control condition (CC)). Measures included knee range of motion (ROM) (Modified Thomas and passive knee extension tests), dynamic balance (Y-Balance Test), biomechanics during a countermovement jump (CMJ) (assessed via OpenCap), 20-m sprint speed, and Illinois agility test performance. The findings indicate that the SS condition showed the greatest improvements in knee flexion (d = 0.51-0.98) and extension (d = 0.45-0.52) ROM. The SDS condition demonstrated superior performance in CMJ jump (highest knee flexion increase, lowest knee valgus, fastest take-off time; d = 0.43-1.89), sprint speed (d = 0.57-0.71), and agility (d = 0.80-0.92). Although dynamic balance improved over time, there were no significant differences between the stretching conditions (p > 0.05). Additionally, the FDS protocol resulted in the smallest gains across all measured outcomes, particularly under fatigued conditions. SDS is most effective for enhancing knee joint mechanics, sprint, and agility recovery post-fatigue, while SS is optimal for ROM restoration. Stretching protocol selection should be contingent on the intended recovery outcome. These findings support incorporating such targeted interventions to optimize athletic performance.
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.