↓ Skip to main content

Specific Changes in Young Soccer Player's Fitness After Traditional Bilateral vs. Unilateral Combined Strength and Plyometric Training

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
292 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
Specific Changes in Young Soccer Player's Fitness After Traditional Bilateral vs. Unilateral Combined Strength and Plyometric Training
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.00265
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rodrigo Ramirez-Campillo, Javier Sanchez-Sanchez, Oliver Gonzalo-Skok, Alejandro Rodríguez-Fernandez, Manuel Carretero, Fabio Y. Nakamura

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare changes in young soccer player's fitness after traditional bilateral vs. unilateral combined plyometric and strength training. Male athletes were randomly divided in two groups; both received the same training, including strength training for knee extensors and flexors, in addition to horizontal plyometric training drills. The only difference between groups was the mode of drills technique: unilateral (UG; n = 9; age, 17.3 ± 1.1 years) vs. bilateral (TG; n = 9; age, 17.6 ± 0.5 years). One repetition maximum bilateral strength of knee muscle extensors (1RM_KE) and flexors (1RM_KF), change of direction ability (COD), horizontal and vertical jump ability with one (unilateral) and two (bilateral) legs, and limb symmetry index were measured before and after an 8-week in-season intervention period. Some regular soccer drills were replaced by combination of plyometric and strength training drills. Magnitude-based inference statistics were used for between-group and within-group comparisons. Beneficial effects (p < 0.05) in 1RM_KE, COD, and several test of jumping performance were found in both groups in comparison to pre-test values. The limb symmetry index was not affected in either group. The beneficial changes in 1RM_KE (8.1%; p = 0.074) and 1RM_KF (6.7%; p = 0.004), COD (3.1%; p = 0.149), and bilateral jump performance (from 2.7% [p = 0.535] to 10.5% [p = 0.002]) were possible to most likely beneficial in the TG than in the UG. However, unilateral jump performance measures achieved likely to most likely beneficial changes in the UG compared to the TG (from 4.5% [p = 0.090] to 8.6% [p = 0.018]). The improvements in jumping ability were specific to the type of jump performed, with greater improvements in unilateral jump performance in the UG and bilateral jump performance in the TG. Therefore, bilateral strength and plyometric training should be complemented with unilateral drills, in order to maximize adaptations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 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 292 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 292 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 42 14%
Student > Master 41 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 8%
Student > Postgraduate 20 7%
Researcher 16 5%
Other 43 15%
Unknown 107 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 121 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 4%
Social Sciences 5 2%
Unspecified 3 1%
Other 13 4%
Unknown 122 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 08 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,374,064
of 24,853,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#1,317
of 15,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,578
of 337,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#51
of 420 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,853,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 337,697 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 420 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.