9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Monitoring Accumulated Training and Match Load in Football: A Systematic Review

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          (1) Background: Training load monitoring has become a relevant research-practice gap to control training and match demands in team sports. However, there are no systematic reviews about accumulated training and match load in football. (2) Methods: Following the preferred reporting item for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), a systematic search of relevant English-language articles was performed from earliest record to March 2020. The search included descriptors relevant to football, training load, and periodization. (3) Results: The literature search returned 7972 articles (WoS = 1204; Pub-Med = 869, SCOPUS = 5083, and SportDiscus = 816). After screening, 36 full-text articles met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Eleven of the included articles analyzed weekly training load distribution; fourteen, the weekly training load and match load distribution; and eleven were about internal and external load relationships during training. The reviewed articles were based on short-telemetry systems ( n = 12), global positioning tracking systems ( n = 25), local position measurement systems ( n = 3), and multiple-camera systems ( n = 3). External load measures were quantified with distance and covered distance in different speed zones ( n = 27), acceleration and deceleration ( n = 13) thresholds, accelerometer metrics ( n = 11), metabolic power output ( n = 4), and ratios/scores ( n = 6). Additionally, the internal load measures were reported with perceived exertion ( n = 16); heart-rate-based measures were reported in twelve studies ( n = 12). (4) Conclusions: The weekly microcycle presented a high loading variation and a limited variation across a competitive season. The magnitude of loading variation seems to be influenced by the type of week, player’s starting status, playing positions, age group, training mode and contextual variables. The literature has focused mainly on professional men; future research should be on the youth and female accumulated training/match load monitoring.

          Related collections

          Most cited references131

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

          David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.

            Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September, 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles.18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies.A detailed explanation and elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration.

              Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research. Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                08 April 2021
                April 2021
                : 18
                : 8
                : 3906
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Research Centre in Sports Sciences, Health and Human Development, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal; pedromiguel.forte@ 123456iscedouro.pt (P.F.); rmpf@ 123456ubi.pt (R.F.); ajsilva@ 123456utad.pt (A.J.S.); barbosa@ 123456ipb.pt (T.M.B.); mmonteiro@ 123456ipb.pt (A.M.M.)
                [2 ]Department of Sports, Exercise and Health Sciences, University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
                [3 ]Departamento de Ciências do Desporto e Educação Física, Instituto Politécnico de Bragança, 5300-253 Bragança, Portugal
                [4 ]Department of Sports, Douro Higher Institute of Educational Sciences, 4560-708 Penafiel, Portugal; amnfla@ 123456gmail.com (M.L.); joana.ribeiro@ 123456iscedouro.pt (J.R.)
                [5 ]Department of Sports Sciences, University of Beira Interior, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: jose.eduardo@ 123456ipb.pt
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4612-3623
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0184-6780
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7530-512X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6816-5165
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6129-2850
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5790-5116
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7071-2116
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4467-1722
                Article
                ijerph-18-03906
                10.3390/ijerph18083906
                8068156
                33917802
                e90f9063-9ed6-4231-8483-911f5aa841cb
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 10 March 2021
                : 06 April 2021
                Categories
                Review

                Public health
                performance,periodization,training control,match demands
                Public health
                performance, periodization, training control, match demands

                Comments

                Comment on this article