Phase angle and trunk muscle mass as distinguishing factors between regular and non-regular players in amateur soccer teams.
Chiaki Matsumoto, Masahiro Ishizaka, Tatsuya Igawa and 2 others
PMID 41209596WHAT IT FOUND
Regular players had higher phase angle and trunk muscle mass than non-regular players.
A phase angle cut-off of 5.65° caught most regular players, but many non-regular players were also classified as regular, so it should not decide team selection alone.
Key findings
01Regular players had higher trunk muscle mass (22.2 kg vs 20.6 kg) and phase angle (6.5° vs 6.0°) than non-regular players, and these differences remained after adjustment for age, height, and weight.
02Phase angle was identified as a significant predictor of regular player classification.
03A phase angle cut-off of 5.65° had sensitivity of 86.8% and specificity of 44.3% for identifying regular players.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was observational and compared players at one time, so it cannot show that higher phase angle or trunk muscle mass caused regular playing time. The participants were male amateur soccer players in Japan, so the findings may not apply to women, other age groups, other ethnicities, or higher competition levels. Training regimen, diet, hydration, sleep, playing position, athletic experience, and specific training content were not controlled. The phase angle cut-off had low specificity, so it was not accurate at identifying non-regular players.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not use phase angle alone to decide team selection. The study showed an association, not that phase angle causes regular playing time, and the cut-off had limited ability to identify non-regular players.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →