Skip to content

Study note

Responses of hematological parameters and aerobic performance of elite men and women swimmers during a 14-week training program.

PMID 19528852 (2009): taper — Time-trial performance (study note for endurance athletes).

Updated Jul 22, 2026

Read the study note

Study note • PMID 19528852

Responses of hematological parameters and aerobic performance of elite men and women swimmers during a 14-week training program.

Journal of strength and conditioning research2009 • DOI 10.1519/JSC.0b013e318194e088

How to use this page

This note summarizes one study record. Check the participants, methods, results, and limitations before applying it to training.

  • Design signal: controlled study.
  • Population relevance: athlete/trained context.
  • Consistency: single-study evidence.
  • Practical recommendation depends on tolerance, context, and whether it protects training consistency.

ELI5

In plain language

The main purpose of the present investigation was to verify the responses of hematological parameters in men and women competitive swimmers during a 14-week training program. (controlled study; athletes).

The abstract suggests a positive effect on Time-trial performance under the tested conditions. Treat this as a signal, not a guarantee; confirm methods and context in the full paper.

Takeaways

What the abstract suggests

  • Study question: The main purpose of the present investigation was to verify the responses of hematological parameters in men and women competitive swimmers during a 14-week training program.
  • The abstract suggests a positive effect on Time-trial performance under the tested conditions.
  • Population: athletes.
  • Protocol cues: abstract may omit dose/timing; use the full paper to replicate accurately.

Protocol

Protocol (as reported)

  • Intervention/exposure: taper.
  • Dose/time/duration: abstract doesn’t include enough detail; use the full paper’s methods section.
  • Outcomes: Time-trial performance.
  • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.

Fit

Who it may help, and who should be cautious

Who it helps

  • Athletes similar to the study population (athletes) working on tapering.
  • Athletes who can measure Time-trial performance with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.

Who should be cautious

  • If you have symptoms or conditions that make the intervention risky, get professional guidance.
  • If you’re near race day and can’t safely test, defer the experiment.

Methods

What the study actually did

  • Design: controlled study.
  • Population: athletes.
  • Outcomes measured: Time-trial performance.
  • Source: PubMed PMID 19528852 (2009) — Journal of strength and conditioning research.

Results excerpt

What the abstract reports

These results were related to the plasma volume changes of the athletes.

Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.

Limits

Limitations and bias

  • Abstract-only summaries can miss critical details (population, protocol, adherence, and context).
  • Single studies often don’t generalize to your event, history, and training load; treat results as a starting point.
  • If your context differs (elite vs recreational; cycling vs running), adjust expectations and be conservative.
  • This is performance information, not medical advice.

Adaptive AI coach for iPhone

Meet your adaptive AI coach.

Tell your coach what you are training for. It builds the plan, follows the work you complete, and adapts upcoming training when recovery, your schedule, or real life changes.

Keep going

Sources