ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Acute effects of foam rolling on jump performance and neuromuscular responses following resistance exercise.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A single bout of high-load resistance exercise can induce acute neuromuscular fatigue, necessitating effective recovery strategies to maintain explosive performance. However, the effects of foam rolling (FR) on vertical and horizontal jump performance and muscle excitation following fatiguing resistance exercise remain unclear. This study examined the acute effects of FR compared with passive recovery (PR) on vertical and horizontal jump performance and lower-extremity muscle excitation following a fatiguing resistance exercise protocol. Methods: Thirty-one healthy, physically active men (age: 21.6 ± 1.3 years; body mass: 75.3 ± 10.3 kg; height: 180.6 ± 7.2 cm) completed a randomized crossover trial comparing FR and PR. Measurements were obtained at pre-test, immediately after exercise (mid-test), and after an 8-min recovery intervention (post-test). Jump performance was assessed using the countermovement jump (CMJ) and single-leg hop for distance (SLHD), while surface electromyography was recorded from the quadriceps, hamstrings, and gastrocnemius muscles during both tasks. Results: A significant condition × time interaction was observed for CMJ and SLHD performance (p<.05; Conclusion: These findings indicate that FR facilitated the post-exercise restoration of vertical jump performance and produced an acute enhancement in horizontal jump performance following resistance exercise, yet the performance benefits were not accompanied by measurable changes in normalized muscle excitation. The results underscore the potential of FR as a practical recovery tool for improving functional performance, while the underlying physiological mechanisms remain uncertain.
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.