SynthesisFrontiers in physiology2026
Comparative effects of unilateral and bilateral plyometric training on physical fitness in adolescent team-sport athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Movement Configuration Elements in Football Players: Beyond Dynamic Correspondence Principles.Sports medicine - open · 2026Review
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
Objective: This study aimed to compare the relative effects of unilateral and bilateral plyometric training on jump, sprint, and change-of-direction performance in adolescent team-sport athletes. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase databases. Effect sizes were calculated from pre- and post-training changes and pooled using a random-effects model, expressed as SMD (Hedges' g) and its 95% CI. Results: A total of 11 studies involving 388 participants were included. Between-group comparisons showed no significant differences for countermovement jump (CMJ) (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.20, I² = 0%, p = 0.649), standing long jump (SLJ) (SMD = -0.20, 95% CI -0.55 to 0.15, I² = 0%, p = 0.268), ≤10 m sprint (SMD = -0.22, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.09, I² = 0%, p = 0.164), ≥20 m sprint (SMD = -0.06, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.20, I² = 0%, p = 0.669), or change-of-direction (COD) (SMD = -0.01, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.31, I² = 27.9%, p = 0.946). Unilateral plyometric training showed greater improvements in single-leg tasks, including single-leg CMJ (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.61, I² = 0%, p = 0.013) and single-leg COD (SMD = -0.61, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.21, I² = 0%, p = 0.003). Conclusion: This study found no clear between-group advantage between unilateral and bilateral plyometric training for bilateral jump performance (CMJ and SLJ), sprint performance (≤10 m and ≥20 m), or COD. However, unilateral plyometric training appeared to provide greater benefits in single-leg tasks, particularly single-leg CMJ and single-leg COD, suggesting a possible task-specific advantage. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier PROSPERO CRD420261324213.
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.