ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Unsupervised learning-based optimization of college students' fundamental capacity evaluation method.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Fundamental Capacity Screen (FCS) is a standardized method for assessing athletic performance and fundamental capacity (FC). However, its current framework lacks refinement, yielding qualitative and insufficiently detailed results that hinder precise athletic training and performance evaluation. Objective: This study employs unsupervised learning to refine FC evaluation, enhancing its objectivity and scientific rigor by providing a more data-driven and interpretable approach. Methods: Data from 123 college students (61 males, mean age 20.42 ± 1.88 years; 62 females, mean age 20.35 ± 1.85 years) regarding FC test indicators were initially subjected to a factor analysis (FA) model to identify underlying factors. Hierarchical clustering was then performed on the first factor. Based on these results, relevant rules of abilities were established, and principal component analysis (PCA) was employed to reduce the dimensionality of multidimensional indicators. Finally, the entropy weight method was used to calculate and adjust the scores of each ability, and the scores were summarized and classified by percentile. Results: FA revealed 3 distinct factors (jumping ability, upper limb ability, and lower limb ability) that together explained 0.8569 of the total variance. The hierarchical clustering dendrogram indicated that jumping ability could be further subdivided. Based on this, 5 ability categories were defined: upper limb balance control, lower limb balance control, core-mediated transfer control, explosive control, and impact control. The composite scores were categorized into 5 intervals: poor, pass, good, excellent, and outstanding. The depicted radar map shows the median characteristics of the composite scores of different abilities. Conclusions: Results demonstrate that unsupervised learning provides a more intuitive and objective framework for FC assessment, offering a novel perspective for athletic performance evaluation and training optimization.
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.