ArticlePloS one2026
Well-being issues: Its influence on RPE and enjoyment in masters water polo training and the player-coach gap.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study aimed to monitor male master water polo players' training by means of well-being (Hooper-Index), internal training load (ITL) parameters (rating of perceived exertion, RPE; session-RPE), and rate of enjoyment, for different types of training (i.e., swimming, SW; technical and tactical, TTW; training matches, TM; friendly matches; FM). Seventeen male master water polo players (age: 50 ± 12 years) performed 19 ± 7 sessions and reported Hooper-Index scores in the morning of training day, and RPE (CR-10) and rate of enjoyment after sessions. Linear mixed effects models were applied to quantify whether players' RPE, session-RPE, and rate of enjoyment were: (i) different for type of training session, (ii) affected by pre-session well-being, and (iii) correlated to corresponding coach's estimations. FM was the training type with the highest session-RPE (p < 0.001, ES range = 1.4-1.9), whereas SW reported the lowest rate of enjoyment (p < 0.05, ES range = 0.8-1.4). Similar effects emerged for coach's estimations (the highest session-RPE in FM, p < 0.001, ES range = 1.4-2.1; the lowest rate of enjoyment in SW, p < 0.001, ES range = 3.2-5.3). RPE resulted affected by all well-being factors excepting sleep quality (β range = 0.16-0.28), whereas session-RPE was influenced only by fatigue, and Hooper-Index overall (β = 0.23) and no effect emerged for rate of enjoyment. Finally, players' and coach's ITL and rate of enjoyment were not correlated, with exception of TM session-RPE (β = 0.21). Master water polo coaches could benefit from these findings, being aware of how training load could be: different for types of workouts, influenced by pre-session well-being, and differently perceived by players if compared with their coach's estimations.
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.