Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42421828›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2026

Biomechanical insights into increasing jump distance in ski jumping: a review classified by hill size.

Yuta Funato, Shinji Sakurai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yuta FunatoGraduate School of Health and Sport Sciences, Chukyo University, Toyota, Japan.
Shinji SakuraiSchool of Health and Sport Sciences, Chukyo University, Toyota, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review organizes biomechanical studies aimed at increasing the jump distance in ski jumping by phase (approach, takeoff, flight, and landing) and classifies them according to hill size. Data were collected from EBSCOhost, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. A total of 1,701 records were retrieved from the databases, of which 42 met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. At first glance, the literature appears to comprehensively cover findings that meet the mechanical objectives required to increase jump distance in each phase. However, when examined by hill size, the majority of literature is concentrated on normal and large hills, which are used in the Olympic Games. Consequently, there is limited scientific evidence regarding small-scale hills (small and medium hills) and largest-scale hills (flying hills). Therefore, future studies should focus on hills other than normal and large hills. To facilitate the application of kinematic data to musculoskeletal models and the estimation of kinetics, there is a need to develop methods that enable easy recording of jumpers and collection of kinematic data with minimal error. Furthermore, because research on landing remains insufficient, further studies on the landing phase are required from an injury-prevention perspective.

Indexed as

approachcoachingflightlandingtakeoff

Identifiers

PMID42421828
PMCPMC13341929

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.