Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background The biomechanical review of front crawl (FC) swimming can enhance athletes' technical proficiency and prevent sports injuries. Over the last 39 years, considerable research has been conducted on FC biomechanics. However, there exists a need for more bibliometrics studies. The objective of this study is to create a knowledge map highlighting the prominent research areas and cutting-edge frontiers in the field of FC biomechanics. Methods Using Citespace, this study conducts bibliometric and visualization analysis of 508 articles in the field of FC biomechanics sourced from the Web of Science Core Collection database. The study focuses on collaboration networks among authors. Additionally, it examines the co-citation analysis of journals and performs co-occurrence, cluster, and burst term analysis on keywords. Results Ricardo J. Fernandes is the most influential author. We found that the journal INT J SPORTS MED has been the most frequently cited publication. The popular keywords in this field include velocity, performance, and swimmers. Moreover, we identified several burst keywords, such as body roll, stroking characteristics, and motor control. Through cluster analysis, we identified that body roll, drag, motor control, and training are highly interconnected concepts in this domain. Conclusion The forefront of research in the field of FC biomechanics has evolved from a focus on fundamental techniques to addressing complex problems and, subsequently, validating research methods and data reliability. Future research directions may consider separately analyzing the impact of shoulder and hip rotation on freestyle performance, investigating the effects of training on freestyle starts or turns, and exploring the potential and application scope of inertial sensors. By integrating other technologies and methods, this research aims to provide comprehensive support and guidance for the training and performance of swimmers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Huang et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: