↓ Skip to main content

Acute effects of static stretching on hip flexor and quadriceps flexibility, range of motion and foot speed in kicking a football

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, March 2004
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acute effects of static stretching on hip flexor and quadriceps flexibility, range of motion and foot speed in kicking a football
Published in
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, March 2004
DOI 10.1016/s1440-2440(04)80040-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

W Young, P Clothier, L Otago, L Bruce, D Liddell

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to determine the effect of static stretching in a warm-up on hip flexor and quadriceps flexibility as measured by a modified Thomas test and on range of motion (ROM) of the leg and foot speed at impact in kicking a football with maximum effort. Sixteen Australian Rules (AR) footballers performed two different warm-ups on different days. One warm-up involved five minutes of sub-maximum running followed by seven practice kicks, while the other also included 4.5 minutes static stretching of the hip flexors and quadriceps after the running. A modified Thomas test was conduced before and after each warm-up. Players performed maximum effort drop punt kicks into a net while being videotaped to determine the ROM of the kicking leg and foot speed at impact with the ball. There were no significant changes in flexibility (p > 0.05) as a result of either warm-up and there were no significant differences between the warm-ups in the kicking variables (p > 0.05). It was concluded that the Thomas test may not have been sensitive to possible acute changes in flexibility from the warm-ups, and that stretching had no influence on kicking ROM or foot speed, possibly because of the complexity of the kicking skill.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Qatar 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 153 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 20%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 31 20%
Unknown 39 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 53 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 6%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 50 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 October 2017.
All research outputs
#15,738,224
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
#1,943
of 2,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,278
of 63,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
#14
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,874 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.5. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 63,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.