ArticleBiology of sport2026
Force vs. impulse: assessing the applicability of dynamic strength indices in individualized training recommendations.
Article in Biology of sport, 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
In this cross-sectional investigation, we aimed to compare impulse-derived (iDSI) and forcederived (fDSI) dynamic strength indices to determine their consistency in guiding individualized training recommendations. It also assessed the agreement between training prescriptions based on these indices and analyzed individualized neuromuscular profiles through case study comparisons. Twenty male skeleton and bobsled athletes performed countermovement jump (CMJ) and isometric mid-thigh pull (IMTP) assessments in a counterbalanced order. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were conducted to examine differences between fDSI and iDSI. Spearman correlation coefficients quantified intra-group relationships, and linear regression analysis evaluated the model fit between indices. Cohen's kappa (κ) was applied to assess agreement in training classifications derived from fDSI and iDSI. Both indices showed limitations in representing lower-limb neuromuscular function (Z = -3.72, p < 0.01, large effect). A moderate correlation was observed between iDSI and fDSI (rs = 0.47, p < 0.05), with moderate agreement in their training recommendations (κ = 0.52, 95% CI: [0.38, 0.66]). Case-study analyses revealed substantial inter-athlete variability in CMJ force-time characteristics, highlighting the need for individualized interpretation within performance profiling. Incorporating phase-specific, multi-metric evaluations of force-time variables may improve the precision of training decisions and better inform athletespecific programming.
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.