Stretching, Balance & Agility
Reviews and one trial of stretching and agility, balance, post-exercise recovery, muscle cramp and running economy. The sources' conclusions are not yet recorded in this library, so this entry states no effect.
None, informational content.
- Persistent joint pain or sudden loss of range of motion, refer to a physician or physical therapist.
What the evidence says
The sources on this entry studied stretching in relation to agility, balance, post-exercise recovery, muscle cramp and running economy. Sun 2024 is a meta-analysis of 15 studies and 2,185 participants on stretching type and agility. Guo 2025 is a systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 studies and 308 participants on stretching and balance. Afonso 2021 is a systematic review and meta-analysis of post-exercise stretching, with 10 studies and 229 participants in the meta-analysis and 11 studies and 289 participants in the qualitative analysis. Konrad 2021 is a scoping review of 11 studies and 111 participants on a single stretching session and running performance and running economy. Miller 2018 is a randomised trial of stretching and cramp susceptibility. The sources' conclusions are not yet recorded in this library, so this entry states no effect for any of these outcomes and no comparison between stretching types.
- All stretching improves balance equally, the trials are mixed and some show acute impairment after static stretching.
- Static stretching sharpens agility before sport, dynamic is the better choice.
- Stretching guarantees better balance in all situations.
- Agreement
- Direction recorded for 0 of 5 sources; not yet recorded for the rest.
- The claim's outcome
- Outcome not yet recorded
- Certainty
- No source states a certainty rating.
What each source measured and concluded (5)
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 2,185 participants across 15 studies
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- meta-analysis, systematic review
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 308 participants across 12 studies
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- systematic review and meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 229 participants across 10 studies for meta-analysis; N = 289 participants across 11 studies for qualitative analysis
- How it was read
- read in full text
- How it was read
- read in full text
- What the review says it includes
- systematic review with meta-analysis
- Studies and participants, as stated
- N = 165 participants across 8 studies
Every source below is shown with its study design and links to the original study. This is the audit trail.