ReviewFrontiers in physiology2026
Comparative effects of exercise training on serve performance and upper-body power in tennis players: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Review 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically compare the effects of different exercise training interventions on the serve performance and upper-body power of tennis players. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP database were systematically searched from inception to May 25, 2026. Healthy tennis players with an intervention period ≥4 weeks were included. Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used as effect sizes. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were conducted on Stata 16.0, and the different training interventions were sorted using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). The quality of each included study was evaluated using Cochrane's Risk-of-Bias Assessment Tool, and the evidence quality of network meta-analysis was assessed using CINeMA. Results: Totally 20 studies involving 606 tennis players were included. Network meta-analysis shows that plyometric training (PT, SMD = 0.91, 95%CI: 0.56 to 1.26), resistance training (RT, SMD = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.46 to 1.23), core stability training (CST, SMD = 0.82, 95%CI: 0.24 to 1.41) and multi-modal training (MMT, SMD = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.33 to 1.20) can all significantly increase serve velocity compared with regular training (REG). The SUCRA ranking shows that PT ranks first in terms of serve velocity (72.6%). There is no significant difference between each training intervention and REG in terms of serve accuracy or upper-body power. CST is ranked first by SUCRA for both indicators (serve accuracy: 75.3%; upper-body power: 81.9%). The CINeMA shows that the quality of evidence is high or moderate for some comparison results in terms of serve velocity, but is generally low for serve accuracy and upper-body power. Conclusions: All types of exercise training interventions can effectively improve the serve velocity of tennis players, among which PT has the best effect. CST shows potential advantages in serve accuracy and upper-body power, but the quality of evidence is weak. PT may be considered the main training method to improve serve velocity, particularly in young tennis players, and should be combined with serve technique and placement control training. CST can be used as an auxiliary intervention for serve accuracy training.
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.