ArticleScientific reports2026
Kinetics, kinematics, and performance modeling of two arm swing techniques in the swimming kick-start.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This experimental study investigated the effect of two arm swing techniques on kinematic and kinetic variables during the swimming kick-start. Twelve elite male swimmers performed starts using forward and butterfly arm swing techniques. Kinematic and kinetic data were collected using a Kistler Performance Analysis System. Data were analyzed for variables calculated from ground reaction force (GRF) and block, above the water, and underwater performance. The results revealed that work, power, and most of the force parameters measured higher values for the butterfly arm swing technique (p < 0.05). The butterfly arm swing was also advantageous regarding resultant underwater and vertical take-off velocities (p < 0.05). The butterfly arm swing technique demonstrated a significant correlation (p < 0.05) between the 15 m swimming time trial and additional parameters, including take-off horizontal velocity, power, force on the block, entry distance, and performance at 5, 7.5, and 10 m of swimming. Regression analysis indicated the combination of different predictors of the time to 15 m, including some GRF metrics, and above the water and underwater parameters for both types of arm swing. The butterfly arm swing produced a significantly shorter start time over the distance from 7.5 m to 15 m than the forward arm swing (p < 0.05). However, this is not necessarily related to the early phase of the start because no significant differences between analyzed dives were found at the 5 m time (p = 0.056).
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.