SynthesisJournal of sports science & medicine2026
Comparative Effects of Training Modalities on Countermovement Jump Performance in Soccer Players: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of sports science & medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive comparison of training modalities for countermovement jump (CMJ) performance in soccer players using a network meta-analysis (NMA). PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, EBSCO, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to November 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving healthy soccer players, evaluating structured training interventions against comparator training or control conditions, and reporting CMJ height outcomes were included. A random-effects NMA was performed to estimate mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and interventions were ranked using P-scores, integrating both direct and indirect evidence. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to age, sex, and competitive level. Twenty-nine RCTs (n = 450) were included. The network showed moderate heterogeneity and no evidence of significant inconsistency. Combined training (CBT) was ranked highest in effect estimates in CMJ performance compared with traditional soccer training (TST) (MD = 4.92, 95% CI: 3.02-6.83, P-score = 0.98), followed by flywheel resistance training (FT) and plyometric training (PT), whereas other interventions did not demonstrate significant improvements. Subgroup analyses indicated that CBT ranked highest in males, youth, and Tier 2 players; PT ranked highest in females and adults; and FT ranked highest in highly trained players. Given the limited sample sizes, limited statistical power, and the fragmented nature of some subgroup comparisons, these findings should be interpreted cautiously. The network showed moderate heterogeneity (I
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.