ArticleSports (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Effects of Resisted Versus Non-Resisted Sprint Training on Countermovement Jump and Sprint Force-Velocity Profile in Youth Footballers: A Randomised Controlled Trial.
Article in Sports (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07418892 (Effects of Resisted Versus Non-resisted Sprint Training on Countermovement Jump and Sprint Force-velocity Profile in Youth Footballers), which is not on this 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.
Effects of Resisted Versus Non-resisted Sprint Training on Countermovement Jump and Sprint Force-velocity Profile in Youth Footballers: a Randomised Controlled Trial
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn youth football, sprint performance depends on the capacity to produce and orient force horizontally during acceleration. Resisted sprinting may preferentially target the force end of the sprint force-velocity profile, whereas free sprinting may favour velocity-oriented adaptations. PURPOSE: To compare the effects of resisted versus non-resisted sprint training on sprint performance and sprint force-velocity variables in youth footballers, while monitoring countermovement jump (CMJ) as a secondary outcome.
methodsThis parallel-group randomised controlled trial included 44 players from two age categories (U14, n = 21; Youth, n = 23). Within each category, players were randomly allocated to resisted sprint training (RST; U14 n = 11, Youth n = 12) or non-resisted sprint training (NRST; U14 n = 10, Youth n = 11). Both groups completed two supervised sessions per week for six weeks. Outcomes were CMJ and sprint-derived variables including maximal theoretical horizontal force (F0), maximal theoretical velocity (V0), maximal power (Pmax), measured maximal sprint velocity (Vmax), peak ratio of horizontal force (RFpeak), decrease in RF with increasing velocity (DRF), and force-velocity slope (FV).
resultsCMJ remained essentially unchanged in both age categories. Sprint performance improved over time, with the pattern of adaptation generally favouring RST for force-oriented sprint mechanical variables (F0, Pmax and RFpeak), whereas improvements in Vmax were observed in both groups. In the Youth category, the FV slope differed between groups post-test (
conclusionsLow-volume resisted sprint training using a sled load of ~20% body mass was associated with more favourable adaptations in force-oriented sprint mechanical variables, whereas non-resisted sprint training tended to favour velocity-oriented characteristics. CMJ performance remained unchanged in both groups. These findings should be interpreted cautiously given the small age-stratified subgroup sizes and the single-club nature of the study.
trial registrationThis study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT07418892).
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.