Trial reportPeerJ2026
Acute effects of dynamic stretching combined with different blood flow restriction pressures on explosive performance in healthy young men.
Trial report in PeerJ, 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
Objective: This study aimed to investigate the acute effects of dynamic stretching (DS) combined with different blood flow restriction (BFR) pressures on explosive performance in healthy young males, and to examine whether these effects differed across estimated arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) levels and performance tasks. Methods: In a randomized crossover design, 20 participants completed four warm-up protocols: DS alone, and DS combined with BFR at 30%, 50%, or 70% of estimated AOP applied to the proximal thighs. Explosive performance was assessed before and after each warm-up protocol using countermovement jump (CMJ), standing long jump (SLJ), 10-m sprint (10mSS), and 505 change-of-direction (505COD) tests. Results: CMJ showed a significant time × condition interaction. All DS+BFR protocols produced greater CMJ change scores than DS alone (all Conclusion: Adding BFR to dynamic stretching produced an additional acute benefit for CMJ, but this effect was not pressure-dependent across the estimated AOP levels tested. The additional benefit of BFR was not observed for SLJ, 10-m sprint, or 505COD, suggesting that the acute effects of DS+BFR may be task-specific.
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.