ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
Mechanical load monitoring in rugby: limitations and future perspectives.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 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
Purpose: Quantifying mechanical work in rugby is essential for improving performance, managing fatigue, and informing load monitoring practices. Traditional metrics that assess acceleration and speed separately fail to capture the interaction between these parameters during gameplay. This study presents an external power approach based on individual acceleration-speed profiles (ASP) to provide an integrated description of players' external work. Methods: Data were collected from 51 professional rugby matches across two seasons. Traditional metrics and external power indicators derived from ASPs were examined to evaluate mechanical demands. This approach combines acceleration and speed into a unified framework, enabling an individualised analysis of high external power actions. Results: Mechanical indicators showed differences between positional groups, with backs exhibiting higher values of high external power actions and external work than forwards. Traditional acceleration thresholds appeared to misclassify some high-demand efforts, particularly those initiated at higher running speeds. The external power approach provided an alternative representation of high-intensity locomotor demands by accounting for the interaction between speed and acceleration. Conclusion: The external power approach represents an additional framework for assessing running-related player-specific mechanical load in rugby, addressing limitations of traditional metrics based on fixed thresholds. It may support a more contextualised interpretation of high-intensity locomotor efforts and should be considered complementary to existing GPS-derived indicators. Future research should investigate its relationship with physiological and performance outcomes, as well as its integration with contact-based demands in rugby.
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.