ReviewFrontiers in physiology2026
Acute effects of plyometric conditioning activities on sprint performance in sports individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Frontiers in physiology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Plyometric conditioning activities are widely used in warm-ups to elicit post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE), yet their acute effects on sprint performance and the factors shaping these responses remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify the acute effects of plyometric conditioning activities on sprint performance in sports individuals, and to identify key moderators of these effects, including conditioning type (single Methods: A systematic search was conducted across four electronic databases. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed in accordance with the Cochrane guidelines. Outcome measures were analyzed using R software (version 4.3.0, R studio). A total of fourteen studies involving 198 participants(78.8% male) were included, comprising randomized controlled trials (RCTs), parallel-group trials, crossover trials, and pre-post-test experimental designs. All effect sizes were derived exclusively from within-condition pre-post comparisons. Results: Plyometric conditioning activities elicited a moderate acute improvement in sprint performance [SMD = 0.51, 95% CI (0.24, 0.79), P < 0.001], with moderate heterogeneity (I²= 51%). Subgroup analyses showed that complex protocols tended to produce larger effects than single protocols, although heterogeneity was substantial for complex training (I²= 80%). Longer rest intervals were associated with significant performance gains [SMD = 0.42, 95% CI (0.16, 0.68), P = 0.002]. Sprint distance moderated the effect: benefits were significant for ≤30 m tests [SMD = 0.73, 95% CI (0.34, 1.13), P = 0.0003], but not for >30 m tests [SMD = 0.17, 95% CI (-0.15, 0.49), P = 0.31], with a significant subgroup difference (P = 0.03). Conclusion: Plyometric conditioning activities were associated with acute changes in sprint performance, with statistically significant pooled effects observed in shorter sprint distances (≤30 m). Larger pooled effect sizes appeared in complex protocols and longer rest intervals, although responses varied across studies. These findings suggest that protocol characteristics and recovery duration may influence acute sprint performance outcomes.
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.