Study note • PMID 28118311
Acute Effects of Static Stretching of Hamstring on Performance and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Risk During Stop-Jump and Cutting Tasks in Female Athletes.
Worth trying if it fits your goal and context.
ELI5
In plain language
Ruan, M, Zhang, Q, and Wu, X. (controlled study; athletes).
The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Injury risk 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: Ruan, M, Zhang, Q, and Wu, X.
- • The abstract doesn’t indicate a clear change in Injury risk under the tested conditions.
- • Population: athletes.
- • Protocol cues (title/abstract): 05 m.
Protocol
Protocol (as reported)
- • Intervention/exposure: stretch, stretching.
- • Dose/time/duration cues in abstract/title: 05 m.
- • Outcomes: Injury risk.
- • Replication note: abstracts often omit adherence and timing; confirm details before changing training or supplementation.
Fit
Who it helps, and who should skip it
Who it helps
- • Athletes similar to the study population (athletes) working on mobility.
- • Athletes who can measure Injury risk with a repeatable workout or time-trial effort.
Who should skip
- • 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: Injury risk.
- • Protocol cues mentioned: 05 m.
- • Source: PubMed PMID 28118311 (2017) — Journal of strength and conditioning research.
Results excerpt
What the abstract reports
“No significant changes in peak knee adduction moment or peak anterior tibia shear force were observed with SSH regardless of the task.”
Note: excerpts are short; for full context, read the paper.
Limits
Limitations & 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.
Coaching beta
Get a plan that adapts to your life.
Join the 26weeks.ai TestFlight beta for adaptive coaching, recovery-aware adjustments, and race-week reminders.
Keep going
Performance Science Lab
Research-backed protocols and evidence grades for endurance performance — built for athletes.
Mobility performance research
Mobility work should be minimal, targeted, and connected to training — not a second sport.
Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol
Evidence-informed protocol: Caffeine for endurance performance: a practical protocol. Practical steps, who it helps, and what to watch out for.
Injury risk research for endurance athletes
Most injury risk comes from load spikes and insufficient tissue tolerance — manage both.