Exercise (EX)VBTvsPBTNCT07802028
Velocity-Based vs Percentage-Based Strength Training in Young Football Players
A study testing Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training, Velocity Based Squat Training and Traditional Strength Training in people with Exercise (EX) and Strength Training Effects, run by Uludag University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of six weeks of velocity-based training (VBT) and traditional percentage-based strength training (TRD) on 20 m sprint performance, vertical jump, and aerobic capacity in elite young football players. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 to 18 years, men onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Exercise (EX), Strength Training Effects, Soccer Performance
- What is being tested?
- Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training, Velocity Based Squat Training and Traditional Strength Training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 58 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 15 Aug 2022to 30 Oct 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 16 to 18 years
- Men only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Male football players aged 16-18 years
- Minimum of five years of licensed competitive football experience
- At least three years of structured strength-training experience
- No prior experience with velocity-based training (VBT)
- Free from musculoskeletal injury within the previous six months
- Willingness to comply with all study procedures and provide written informed consent
Who cannot join
- Previous participation in a VBT program
- Any musculoskeletal injury within the previous six months
- Use of medications or stimulants that may affect physical performance
- Failure to complete baseline testing or intervention procedures
- Presence of cardiovascular, neurological, or metabolic disorders that could interfere with study participation
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Bursa Uludağ University, Faculty of Spor Sciences
Bursa, NİLÜFER, 16120
About this study
Official title: The Comparative Effects of Velocity-Based and Percentage-Based Strength Training on Physical Performance in Young Football Players
The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of six weeks of velocity-based training (VBT) and traditional percentage-based strength training (TRD) on 20 m sprint performance, vertical jump, and aerobic capacity in elite young football players.
The main research question was: Does VBT produce greater improvements than TRD in these performance markers? Researchers compared VBT with TRD to determine whether VBT leads to superior enhancements in sprint speed, jump performance, and aerobic capacity among elite young football players.
Read more
Participants:
Performed either VBT squat training, VBT squat plus bench press training, or TRD squat training. Completed VBT or TRD sessions three times per week for six weeks. Attended the laboratory for measurements and tests before and after the six-week training program.
Read the detailed description
All participants had been following the same training program for the previous two months: five weekly training sessions (each lasting 60-90 minutes) and one match, with intensity ranging from 50-90% of maximum heart rate calculated using the Karvonen method, monitored with Polar V800 devices. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups, with equal distribution across age categories: 1) Traditional Strength Training (TRD), 2) Velocity Based Squat Training (Sq_V), and 3) Velocity Based Squat + Bench Press Training (SqBp_V). Study protocols were performed on three consecutive days per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. In the TRD group, only the 1-RM was calculated in the first week, while in the SqBp_V and Sq_V groups, 1-RM values were calculated weekly, and the 6-week training program was updated weekly based on these 1-RM values. The last weight lifted was recorded as the 1-RM in kilograms. The number of sets and repetitions was matched between the TRD and Sq_V groups. However, the SqBp_V group performed the same program as Sq_V plus bench press, using the same procedure. Therefore, total weekly volume (sets × repetitions × exercises) was matched between the VBT and TRD groups. Pre tests were conducted one week prior to the intervention, and post tests one week after completion (Figures 1 and 2). The 20 m Sprint, CMJ, and Yo-Yo IR2 were performed as both pre tests and post tests. All workouts and tests were familiarized two days before the pre test. The study was conducted on natural grass and in a fitness facility between 16:00-18:00 at 20-24°C and 60-70% humidity.
- Conditions
- Exercise (EX), Strength Training Effects, Soccer Performance
- Being tested
- Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training, Velocity Based Squat Training, Traditional Strength Training
- Keywords
- strength training, soccer, performance enhancement, velocity
- Medical subject headings
- Motor Activity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press TrainingOther
The squat and bench press strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for both squat and bench press was assessed weekly, and the training program was updated accordingly throughout the six-week intervention.
Velocity Based Squat TrainingOther
The squat strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for the squat was assessed weekly, and the training program was updated accordingly throughout the six-week intervention.
Traditional Strength TrainingOther
The squat strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for the squat was assessed only in the first week, and this value was used to prescribe training loads throughout the intervention.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Velocity-Based Squat + Bench Press Training (SqBp_V) | Experimental | Velocity-based strength training (VBT) consisted of squat and bench press exercises. Receives: Other: Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training |
| Velocity-Based Squat Training (Sq_V) | Experimental | Velocity-based strength training (VBT) consisted of squat exercises. Receives: Other: Velocity Based Squat Training |
| Traditional Strength Training (TRD) | Active comparator | Traditional strength training (TRD) consisted of squat exercises. Receives: Other: Traditional Strength Training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Countermovement jump (CMJ)
In the countermovement jump (CMJ) test, vertical jump height was measured using an Infinitek electronic vertical jump device (Infinitek Company, Istanbul, Turkey). Each participant performed two trials, separated by a 60-second passive rest interval. The better performance was recorded for analysis.
Measured: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.
20m Sprint
A wireless two-door Sinar photocell device (Sinar, Turkey) was used to measure 20-meter sprint performance. Each participant performed two 20-meter sprints, separated by a three-minute rest interval, and the better time was recorded. Participants were instructed to walk forward naturally with relaxed arms and an upright posture beginning three meters before the timing line. After the final step before the line, they accelerated maximally through the 20-meter distance.
Measured: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.
Aerobic capacity
Aerobic capacity was assessed using the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2 (Yo-Yo IR2). In this test, participants performed repeated 2 × 20-meter shuttle runs at progressively increasing speeds, moving back and forth between the starting, turning, and finishing lines. Between each shuttle run, a 10-second active recovery period was allowed, during which participants walked or jogged within a 5-meter recovery zone. Running speed was dictated by audio signals automatically controlled by a CD player. Cones were used to mark 2-meter-wide, 20-meter-long running lanes, with an additional cone placed 5 meters behind the starting line to indicate the recovery area.The test was terminated when the participant was unable to continue or failed to reach the finish line on two consecutive occasions. The total distance covered was recorded as the test result. Maximal oxygen uptake was estimated using the following equation: VO2max = distance (m) × 0.0136 + 45.3
Measured: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.
Secondary outcomes (3)
TRD One maximum repetition - Squat (TRD 1-RM Squat):
In the TRD group, the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) squat was determined using the traditional percentage-based method. Before the athletes began the test, the coach selected an appropriate starting weight for each participant. Athletes were advised to begin with lower loads to ensure proper anatomical positioning and technique before progressing to heavier weights.
Measured: Before enrollment to exercise programme.
One maximum repetition - Squat VBT (1-RM Squat VBT)
In the VBT group, the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) squat was measured weekly using an Apple iPhone 7 Plus (iOS 12.4.1; Apple Inc., USA) with the My Lift application (My Jump Lab, Spain). Before beginning the exercise, participants received a verbal command to initiate the movement. The squat exercise was uploaded to the device and recorded. The range of motion during the squat was measured in meters. For standardization, participants were instructed to squat until reaching 90° of knee flexion and then immediately return to the starting position with full extension of the knee and hip joints.
Measured: Before enrollment to exercise programme.
One maximum repetition - Bench Press VBT (1-RM Bench press VBT)
In the VBT group, the one-repetition maximum (1-RM) bench press was measured weekly using an Apple iPhone 7 Plus (iOS 12.4.1; Apple Inc., USA) with the My Lift application (My Jump Lab, Spain). Before beginning the exercise, participants received a verbal command to initiate the movement. The bench press exercise was uploaded to the device and recorded. The range of motion during the bench press was measured in meters. For standardization, participants were instructed to lower the bar to the chest and then immediately return to the starting position with full elbow extension. Prior to initiating the speed-based strength training measurement, the distance from the center of the bar to the participant's chest was measured and entered into the My Lift application as required.
Measured: Before enrollment to exercise programme.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Sep 2026
- Study start15 Aug 2022
- Primary completion1 Oct 2022
- Study completion30 Oct 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Exercise (EX)Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 58 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Uludag University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ramiz ARABACI, Uludag University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07802028
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2011-KAEK-26/343
- Acronym
- VBTvsPBT
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 30 Aug 2026
- Last updated
- 9 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Wang Y, Qiu J, Dai D, Li Q, Wang X, Luo Q. The effects of velocity-based vs. percentage-based resistance training on sports performance in trainedindividuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2026 Jan 5;18(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01504-9.
PubMed 41491263Loturco I, Pereira LA, Boullosa D. Reassessing the Role of 1-Repetition Maximum Testing for Resistance-Training Prescription and Monitoring. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2026 Mar 3;21(8):968-972. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2025-0700. Print 2026 Aug 1.
PubMed 41780507Jimenez-Reyes P, Castano-Zambudio A, Cuadrado-Penafiel V, Gonzalez-Hernandez JM, Capelo-Ramirez F, Martinez-Aranda LM, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ. Differences between adjusted vs. non-adjusted loads in velocity-based training: consequences for strength training control and programming. PeerJ. 2021 Mar 23;9:e10942. doi: 10.7717/peerj.10942. eCollection 2021.
PubMed 33828909Flanagan, E., & Jovanovic M. (2014). Researched applications of velocity-based training. Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning, 22(2), 58-69.
Chung, B., Bing, W., & Kim, D. (2025). Velocity-based vs. percentage-based training: Superior effects on acceleration and explosive power in high school triple jump athletes. Applied Sciences, 15(22), 12010. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152212010
Balsalobre-Fernandez C, Torres-Ronda L. The Implementation of Velocity-Based Training Paradigm for Team Sports: Framework, Technologies, Practical Recommendations and Challenges. Sports (Basel). 2021 Mar 30;9(4):47. doi: 10.3390/sports9040047.
PubMed 33808302
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Comparative Effects of Velocity-Based and Percentage-Based Strength Training on Physical Performance in Young Football Players
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07802028
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- VBTvsPBT / 2011-KAEK-26/343
- Conditions
- Exercise (EX), Strength Training Effects, Soccer Performance
- Keywords
- strength training, soccer, performance enhancement, velocity
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 58 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Uludag UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Aug 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Oct 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Oct 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Sep 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of six weeks of velocity-based training (VBT) and traditional percentage-based strength training (TRD) on 20 m sprint performance, vertical jump, and aerobic capacity in elite young football players.
The main research question was: Does VBT produce greater improvements than TRD in these performance markers? Researchers compared VBT with TRD to determine whether VBT leads to superior enhancements in sprint speed, jump performance, and aerobic capacity among elite young football players.
Participants:
Performed either VBT squat training, VBT squat plus bench press training, or TRD squat training. Completed VBT or TRD sessions three times per week for six weeks. Attended the laboratory for measurements and tests before and after the six-week training program.
Detailed description
All participants had been following the same training program for the previous two months: five weekly training sessions (each lasting 60-90 minutes) and one match, with intensity ranging from 50-90% of maximum heart rate calculated using the Karvonen method, monitored with Polar V800 devices. Participants were randomly assigned to three groups, with equal distribution across age categories: 1) Traditional Strength Training (TRD), 2) Velocity Based Squat Training (Sq_V), and 3) Velocity Based Squat + Bench Press Training (SqBp_V). Study protocols were performed on three consecutive days per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. In the TRD group, only the 1-RM was calculated in the first week, while in the SqBp_V and Sq_V groups, 1-RM values were calculated weekly, and the 6-week training program was updated weekly based on these 1-RM values. The last weight lifted was recorded as the 1-RM in kilograms. The number of sets and repetitions was matched between the TRD and Sq_V groups. However, the SqBp_V group performed the same program as Sq_V plus bench press, using the same procedure. Therefore, total weekly volume (sets × repetitions × exercises) was matched between the VBT and TRD groups. Pre tests were conducted one week prior to the intervention, and post tests one week after completion (Figures 1 and 2). The 20 m Sprint, CMJ, and Yo-Yo IR2 were performed as both pre tests and post tests. All workouts and tests were familiarized two days before the pre test. The study was conducted on natural grass and in a fitness facility between 16:00-18:00 at 20-24°C and 60-70% humidity.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Velocity-Based Squat + Bench Press Training (SqBp_V) | Experimental | Other: Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press TrainingVelocity-based strength training (VBT) consisted of squat and bench press exercises. |
| Velocity-Based Squat Training (Sq_V) | Experimental | Other: Velocity Based Squat TrainingVelocity-based strength training (VBT) consisted of squat exercises. |
| Traditional Strength Training (TRD) | Active comparator | Other: Traditional Strength TrainingTraditional strength training (TRD) consisted of squat exercises. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 to 18 years
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Male football players aged 16-18 years
- Minimum of five years of licensed competitive football experience
- At least three years of structured strength-training experience
- No prior experience with velocity-based training (VBT)
- Free from musculoskeletal injury within the previous six months
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Previous participation in a VBT program
- Any musculoskeletal injury within the previous six months
- Use of medications or stimulants that may affect physical performance
- Failure to complete baseline testing or intervention procedures
- Presence of cardiovascular, neurological, or metabolic disorders that could interfere with study participation
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press TrainingThe squat and bench press strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for both squat and bench press was assessed weekly, and the training program was updated accordingly throughout the six-week intervention. | Other | Velocity-Based Squat + Bench Press Training (SqBp_V) |
| Velocity Based Squat TrainingThe squat strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for the squat was assessed weekly, and the training program was updated accordingly throughout the six-week intervention. | Other | Velocity-Based Squat Training (Sq_V) |
| Traditional Strength TrainingThe squat strength program was implemented for six weeks, with three sessions per week, immediately after regular soccer practice. The one-repetition maximum (1-RM) for the squat was assessed only in the first week, and this value was used to prescribe training loads throughout the intervention. | Other | Traditional Strength Training (TRD) |
Primary outcome
Countermovement jump (CMJ)
Time frame: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.
In the countermovement jump (CMJ) test, vertical jump height was measured using an Infinitek electronic vertical jump device (Infinitek Company, Istanbul, Turkey). Each participant performed two trials, separated by a 60-second passive rest interval. The better performance was recorded for analysis.
20m Sprint
Time frame: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.
A wireless two-door Sinar photocell device (Sinar, Turkey) was used to measure 20-meter sprint performance. Each participant performed two 20-meter sprints, separated by a three-minute rest interval, and the better time was recorded. Participants were instructed to walk forward naturally with relaxed arms and an upright posture beginning three meters before the timing line. After the final step before the line, they accelerated maximally through the 20-meter distance.
Aerobic capacity
Time frame: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.
Aerobic capacity was assessed using the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2 (Yo-Yo IR2). In this test, participants performed repeated 2 × 20-meter shuttle runs at progressively increasing speeds, moving back and forth between the starting, turning, and finishing lines. Between each shuttle run, a 10-second active recovery period was allowed, during which participants walked or jogged within a 5-meter recovery zone. Running speed was dictated by audio signals automatically controlled by a CD player. Cones were used to mark 2-meter-wide, 20-meter-long running lanes, with an additional cone placed 5 meters behind the starting line to indicate the recovery area.The test was terminated when the participant was unable to continue or failed to reach the finish line on two consecutive occasions. The total distance covered was recorded as the test result. Maximal oxygen uptake was estimated using the following equation: VO2max = distance (m) × 0.0136 + 45.3
3 secondary outcomes
TRD One maximum repetition - Squat (TRD 1-RM Squat):
Time frame: Before enrollment to exercise programme.
One maximum repetition - Squat VBT (1-RM Squat VBT)
Time frame: Before enrollment to exercise programme.
One maximum repetition - Bench Press VBT (1-RM Bench press VBT)
Time frame: Before enrollment to exercise programme.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Sep 2026.
- Background: PubMed 41491263Wang Y, Qiu J, Dai D, Li Q, Wang X, Luo Q. The effects of velocity-based vs. percentage-based resistance training on sports performance in trainedindividuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2026 Jan 5;18(1):57. doi: 10.1186/s13102-025-01504-9.
- Background: PubMed 41780507Loturco I, Pereira LA, Boullosa D. Reassessing the Role of 1-Repetition Maximum Testing for Resistance-Training Prescription and Monitoring. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2026 Mar 3;21(8):968-972. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2025-0700. Print 2026 Aug 1.
- Background: PubMed 33828909Jimenez-Reyes P, Castano-Zambudio A, Cuadrado-Penafiel V, Gonzalez-Hernandez JM, Capelo-Ramirez F, Martinez-Aranda LM, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ. Differences between adjusted vs. non-adjusted loads in velocity-based training: consequences for strength training control and programming. PeerJ. 2021 Mar 23;9:e10942. doi: 10.7717/peerj.10942. eCollection 2021.
- BackgroundFlanagan, E., & Jovanovic M. (2014). Researched applications of velocity-based training. Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning, 22(2), 58-69.
- BackgroundChung, B., Bing, W., & Kim, D. (2025). Velocity-based vs. percentage-based training: Superior effects on acceleration and explosive power in high school triple jump athletes. Applied Sciences, 15(22), 12010. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152212010
- Background: PubMed 33808302Balsalobre-Fernandez C, Torres-Ronda L. The Implementation of Velocity-Based Training Paradigm for Team Sports: Framework, Technologies, Practical Recommendations and Challenges. Sports (Basel). 2021 Mar 30;9(4):47. doi: 10.3390/sports9040047.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Exercise (EX)
Not yet recruiting
Effect of KA-EX Supplementation on Recovery Parameters in High-Level Young Football Players
Sport, Muscle Fatigue
Not yet recruiting
POSH-Ex: Physiotherapist-Led Telerehabilitation Exercise Programme for Postpartum Sexual Health
Postpartum Sexual Dysfunction, Postpartum Depression
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Ex Onc SLED: A Study Utilizing A Weighted Sled for Horizontal Resistance Training
Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
Trial of a Virtual Exercise-based Rehabilitation Program to Treat Persistent Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN)
Chemotherapy-induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN)
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
Exercise-based Rehabilitation to Treat Persistent Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy (CIPN)
Chemotherapy-induced Peripheral Neuropathy
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Velocity Based Squat and Bench Press Training, Velocity Based Squat Training and Traditional Strength Training in people with Exercise (EX) and Strength Training Effects, run by Uludag University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Countermovement jump (CMJ) (time frame: From enrollment to the completion of the six-week exercise program, participants followed the prescribed training protocol.). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07802028, which also lists 6 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Sep 2026.