ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Comparative study of the effects of VBT training with different velocity loss thresholds on lower limb explosive force of adolescent sprinters.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the effects of velocity-based training (VBT) on lower-limb explosive performance in adolescent sprinters and to compare the training adaptations induced by different velocity loss thresholds (VLT). Methods: Forty-five male adolescent sprinters were randomly assigned to three experimental groups that trained with VLT of 10% (G1), 20% (G2), and 30% (G3), respectively. All participants completed a 6-week VBT squat program performed twice per week at an intensity of 80% 1RM, with a fixed total volume of 20 repetitions per session. The session rating of perceived exertion (sRPE) was used to monitor subjective fatigue. Pre- and post-intervention tests included 30 m sprint performance, squat 1RM, countermovement jump (CMJ) height and relative peak power, and drop jump (DJ) reactive strength index (RSI). Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and paired-sample t-tests. Results: After 6 weeks of training, all groups showed significant improvements in squat 1RM, 30 m sprint performance, CMJ height, CMJ relative peak power, and DJ RSI (p < 0.05). Between-group comparisons revealed no significant differences in 1RM improvement (p > 0.05), whereas the 10% VLT group demonstrated significantly greater enhancements in CMJ height, CMJ relative peak power, 30 m sprint performance, and RSI compared with the 30% VLT group (p < 0.05). The overall trend in performance gains was consistent: 10% VLT > 20% VLT> 30% VLT. Monitoring data showed that sRPE values increased significantly with higher VLT (p < 0.001), indicating that lower VLT settings effectively reduced fatigue accumulation. Conclusion: VBT is an effective method for improving lower-limb explosive performance in adolescent sprinters. Under fixed training volume conditions, applying a lower VLT (e.g.,10%) produces superior training outcomes, likely due to reduced fatigue, maintenance of higher movement velocity and power output, and enhanced neuromuscular adaptations. Coaches are therefore advised to prioritize lower VLT when designing VBT programs aimed at developing explosive strength in youth sprinters.
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.