ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
The impact of warm-up intensity on lower-limb explosive power and agility performance in male university football athletes.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. 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.
- Effects of plyometric training on different surfaces on lower-limb power, dynamic balance, and agility in male collegiate tennis players.Frontiers in physiology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWarm-up intensity is considered a key factor influencing acute physical performance, yet its specific effects on explosive power and agility in university football players remain unclear. This study compared the acute effects of low-, moderate-, and high-intensity warm-up on lower-limb explosive power and agility.
methodsTwenty male university football athletes completed three 15-min warm-up protocols differing in intensity. Performance was assessed using the standing triple jump (STJ), 10 m sprint, 505 test, and T-test at pre-, post-, and post-10. Generalized mixed linear models were applied to evaluate the effects of intensity and time, with results reported as standardized effect sizes (ES) and 90% confidence limits (CL).
resultsThe 10 m sprint performance was substantially better after the low-intensity warm-up than the moderate-intensity (ES; ± 90% CL: Post: 1.93; ± 0.64; Post-10: 3.31; ± 0.45) and high-intensity (Post: 1.90; ± 0.64; Post-10: 3.56; ± 0.65) warm-ups. The 505 test also showed superior performance after the low-intensity warm-up (vs. moderate: 1.55; ± 0.74, 1.16; ± 0.44; vs. high: 3.15; ± 0.72, 1.24; ± 0.44). Notably, in the 505 test (post: 1.6; ± 0.7; post-10: trivial), performance following the moderate-intensity warm-up at post was also substantially superior to that following the high-intensity warm-up. The T-test demonstrated a similar advantage (vs. moderate: 0.95; ± 0.23, 0.78; ± 0.22; vs. high: 0.86; ± 0.23, 0.73; ± 0.22). In contrast, the STJ (vs. low, post: 0.66; ± 0.31; post-10: 0.51; ± 0.31) improved only immediately after the moderate- and high-intensity warm-ups.
conclusionLow-intensity warm-up produced the most consistent and sustained improvements in sprint and agility performance. Moderate-intensity warm-up showed only a brief advantage in the 505 test, whereas high-intensity warm-up generally impaired speed and change-of-direction performance, with any explosive power gains being short-lived. These findings identify warm-up intensity as a key determinant of pre-competition readiness in male university football athletes.
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.