ArticleScientific reports2026
Effects of various warm-up on sit-and-reach performance, explosive power, and sprint performance in collegiate track and field athletes.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Effective warm-up routines are crucial for enhancing athletic performance and reducing the risk of injuries. Among various warm-up methods, foam rolling and dynamic stretching have gained popularity for their potential benefits on range of motion, explosive power, and speed. To investigate the effects of foam rolling combined with dynamic stretching on the performance of elite collegiate track and field athletes. Thirty open-category track and field athletes were selected as participants. All subjects completed three experiments using an intra-group design. Each experiment involved a different stretching scenario conducted randomly: dynamic stretching (DS), static stretching combined with dynamic stretching (SSCDS), and foam rolling combined with dynamic stretching (FRCDS). Immediately after completion of each stretching protocol, sit-and-reach performance, explosive power, and sprint performance were assessed. There was a minimum 48-hour interval between each experiment. Statistical analysis was conducted using repeated measures one-way ANOVA for comparison. If the F value showed significant differences, Bonferroni post-hoc comparisons were performed, with the significance level set at P < 0.05. The study found significant effects of different stretching interventions on sit-and-reach performance, standing long jump, vertical jump, and 30-meter sprint performance. The FRCDS condition consistently outperformed both DS and SSCDS in sit-and-reach performance (34.63 ± 11.49 cm vs. 30.33 ± 11.25 cm and 31.30 ± 11.21 cm), standing long jump (252.43 ± 38.09 cm vs. 247.50 ± 39.56 cm and 248.56 ± 38.34 cm), and vertical jump (41.54 ± 8.47 cm vs. 39.42 ± 8.28 cm and 39.85 ± 8.24 cm). In the 30-meter sprint, SSCDS was superior to DS (4.36 ± 0.42 s vs. 4.42 ± 0.47 s), while FRCDS outperformed both (4.25 ± 0.48 s). The results of this study suggest that foam rolling combined with dynamic stretching may acutely improve sit-and-reach performance, explosive power, and sprint performance in elite collegiate track and field 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.