Match-play data according to playing categories in badminton: a systematic review.

IF 2.6 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Frontiers in Sports and Active Living Pub Date : 2025-02-26 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fspor.2025.1466778
Bagus Winata, Joana Brochhagen, Tommy Apriantono, Matthias Wilhelm Hoppe
{"title":"Match-play data according to playing categories in badminton: a systematic review.","authors":"Bagus Winata, Joana Brochhagen, Tommy Apriantono, Matthias Wilhelm Hoppe","doi":"10.3389/fspor.2025.1466778","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This systematic review aimed to investigate differences in match-play data according to the five playing categories in badminton.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Searches were conducted on ScienceDirect, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies assessing technical-tactical actions, activity profiles, or external and internal loads as match-play outcome measures according to the five playing categories in badminton were deemed eligible. Quality assessment was performed using a modified version of the AMSTAR-2 checklist to compare the outcome measures, effect sizes (ES) and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 12,967 studies that were identified, 34 met the eligibility criteria. Among these, 29 and five were rated as excellent and good quality, respectively. Some individual ESs of activity profiles showed up to large differences (ES ≤ 4.52) favouring the men's compared with the women's singles category. Some individual ESs of activity profiles showed up to large differences (ES ≤ -2.72) favouring the women's doubles category compared with other doubles categories. The overall ESs for the activity profiles were large (ES = -0.76 to -0.90), favouring the doubles over the singles categories in both sexes.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>There are up to large differences in match-play data according to the five playing categories in badminton, each category placing specific demands on the players. Thus, each category requires specific training and testing procedures, what should be considered by scientists and coaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":12716,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","volume":"7 ","pages":"1466778"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11897274/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2025.1466778","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This systematic review aimed to investigate differences in match-play data according to the five playing categories in badminton.

Materials and methods: The systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Searches were conducted on ScienceDirect, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies assessing technical-tactical actions, activity profiles, or external and internal loads as match-play outcome measures according to the five playing categories in badminton were deemed eligible. Quality assessment was performed using a modified version of the AMSTAR-2 checklist to compare the outcome measures, effect sizes (ES) and associated 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

Results: Of the 12,967 studies that were identified, 34 met the eligibility criteria. Among these, 29 and five were rated as excellent and good quality, respectively. Some individual ESs of activity profiles showed up to large differences (ES ≤ 4.52) favouring the men's compared with the women's singles category. Some individual ESs of activity profiles showed up to large differences (ES ≤ -2.72) favouring the women's doubles category compared with other doubles categories. The overall ESs for the activity profiles were large (ES = -0.76 to -0.90), favouring the doubles over the singles categories in both sexes.

Discussion: There are up to large differences in match-play data according to the five playing categories in badminton, each category placing specific demands on the players. Thus, each category requires specific training and testing procedures, what should be considered by scientists and coaches.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
羽毛球比赛分类数据的系统回顾。
本系统综述旨在探讨羽毛球运动中五种比赛类型的比赛数据差异。材料和方法:系统评价按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行。在ScienceDirect、PubMed、b谷歌Scholar、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane Library数据库上进行了搜索。研究评估技术战术动作,活动概况,或外部和内部负荷作为比赛赛结果的措施,根据羽毛球运动的五个类别被认为是合格的。采用改良版AMSTAR-2检查表进行质量评估,比较结果测量,计算效应量(ES)和相关95%置信区间。结果:在12967项研究中,34项符合入选标准。其中,优良的有29个,优良的有5个。与女子单打类别相比,一些个体活动谱的ES显示出较大的差异(ES≤4.52),有利于男子。与其他双打项目相比,女子双打项目与其他双打项目相比,某些个体活动谱的ES表现出较大差异(ES≤-2.72)。活动概况的总体ESs很大(ES = -0.76至-0.90),无论男女,双打者都比单打者更受青睐。讨论:羽毛球的五种比赛类型在比赛赛数据上有很大的差异,每一种类型对运动员都有特定的要求。因此,每个类别都需要特定的训练和测试程序,这是科学家和教练应该考虑的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
459
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Countermeasures to oppose Alberta's use of the notwithstanding clause to exclude transgender athletes from women's sport. Impact of unilateral single-mode balance training vs. combined balance and plyometric training on soccer players' interlimb asymmetry in balance and neuromuscular performance. Classification of fielders in nippon professional baseball using a Gaussian mixture clustering model. Metabolomic signatures connect and mediate sedentary time-driven mortality risk in patients with cardiovascular disease. Transferability of the first-mover advantage to individual sports: a conceptual and theoretical analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1