ArticlePloS one2026
Post activation performance enhancement effects on countermovement jumps in men and women.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study investigated the post-activation performance enhancement (PAPE) effects of six different conditioning activities on countermovement jump (CMJ) height and compared the PAPE effects between sexes. We recruited 18 male and 17 female participants (age: 24.6 ± 3.7 y, height: 1.71 ± 0.10 m, body mass: 75.7 ± 16.1 kg) with at least one year of resistance exercise experience. They performed a familiarization session in which the one-repetition maximum back squat (1-repetition maximum back squat: 134 ± 32 kg; 1- repetition maximum back squat/body mass: 1.8 ± 0.4) was assessed. This was followed by six visits for six different conditioning activities in a randomized order; back squat, concentric-only back squat, eccentric-only back squat, drop jump, drop jump with a weight vest (10% body mass), and eccentric-only drop jump with the weight vest. At each visit, participants performed a standardized warm-up for 10 minutes, followed by three CMJs, the conditioning activity of the day, and after 4 minutes, three CMJs. Thus, post activation performance enhancement was assessed by the change in CMJ height (average of three trials) from pre- to post-conditioning activity. The changes were compared among the six conditioning activities by a 6x2 repeated measures analysis of variance. In the six conditions, no condition x time (pre-post) interaction effect (F[3.89,34]=1.71; p = 0.153; ղ2p=0.048) was evident for all participants, and this was also the case for men (F[5,17]=1.54; p = 0.185; ղ2p=0.083) and women (F[5,16]=0.362; p = 0.873; ղ2p=0.022), without significant differences between sexes. These results showed no PAPE after the conditioning activities within a 4-minute window for moderately trained individuals, and no difference between men and women. It appears that the PAPE effect is small when the conditioning activities are proceeded by warm-up exercise, and no sex difference exists for the effect. In practice, sports and exercise practitioners need to consider the individual characteristics that can influence the PAPE response when isolating the conditioning activity from the warm-up.
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.