ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Effect of vertical and horizontal plyometric training on physical fitness performance in 13-14-year-old untrained boys.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlyometric training (PT) is widely recognized as an effective method for enhancing physical fitness and motor competence. PT in different directions will also bring different returns. However, its effects on physical fitness in untrained adolescents, especially specific age group, remain unclear. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the effects of vertical versus horizontal plyometric training on physical fitness in adolescent boys aged 13–14 years.
methodsOne hundred untrained boys aged 13–14 years were recruited and randomly assigned to one of three groups: the vertical plyometric training group (VPT), the horizontal plyometric training group (HPT), and the control group (CG). The experimental period lasted 8 weeks and comprised 16 training sessions. Participants in VPT and HPT completed plyometric training twice per week with identical training volumes. Height, body mass, vertical jump, standing long jump, 50-m sprint, T-test, 1000-m run, and a 4-minute skipping test were measured before and after the experiment.
resultsBoth vertical and horizontal plyometric training (VPT, HPT) significantly improved all performance indicators (P < 0.01), whereas the control group showed only minor gains in standing long jump and 50m sprint. Group differences between VPT and HPT were significant for standing long jump (Cohen’s d = -1.055, P < 0.001), 50-meter sprint (Cohen’s d = 0.251, P = 0.005), and T-test (Cohen’s d = 0.722, P = 0.007).
conclusionsThese findings suggest that practitioners should recognize the benefits of plyometric training (PT) for untrained boys aged 13–14 years. Horizontal PT (HPT) yields improvements comparable to vertical PT (VPT) in vertical jump and endurance performance, but HPT is superior for standing long jump, 50-m sprint, and change-of-direction ability. Future research should examine combined protocols across different ages and sexes to better understand how PT influences the development of motor competence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.