Study note • PMID 40630396
Acute effects of the RAMP warm-up on sprint and jump performance in youth soccer players.
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: randomized trial.
- • 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
INTRODUCTION: Pre-competition warm-ups play a critical role in optimizing athletic performance and minimizing injury risk. (randomized trial; athletes).
The abstract suggests a positive effect on 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: INTRODUCTION: Pre-competition warm-ups play a critical role in optimizing athletic performance and minimizing injury risk.
- • The abstract suggests a positive effect on Injury risk 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: stretch, stretching (vs control condition).
- • Dose/time/duration: abstract doesn’t include enough detail; use the full paper’s methods section.
- • Outcomes: Injury risk.
- • 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 mobility.
- • Athletes who can measure Injury risk 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: randomized trial.
- • Population: athletes.
- • Comparator: control condition.
- • Outcomes measured: Injury risk.
- • Source: PubMed PMID 40630396 (2025) — Frontiers in physiology.
Results excerpt
What the abstract reports
“Post hoc Bonferroni comparisons indicated that the RAMP group exhibited superior results compared with static stretching (Effect size: d = 0.41) and control (Effect size: d = 0.52), while no notable difference was observed between static stretching and control conditions.”
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
Performance Science Lab
Research summaries for endurance athletes, with study context, practical protocols, and clear limitations.
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.