Fig 1.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines flow chart for literature search and inclusion.
Fig 2.
Quality of evidence for included studies (n = 11).
Each bar represents the proportion of studies (%) rated as “Moderate” to “Very low” quality at each stage of the assessment, represented across the x-axis. The stages include the modified Downs and Black [40] appraisal score (priori-quality), GRADE criteria, assessing the study design, followed by two questions to assess study indirectness; Q.1. was an accurate equation used to determine inter-limb asymmetry? Q.2. Was the equipment used to identify unilateral jump height and subsequent outcome variables valid and reliable? The final bar signifies the final rating of evidence quality.
Fig 3.
Forest plot of the 20-transformed effect sizes across seven studies (n = 178) assessing the effect of inter-limb asymmetries on bilateral jump performance measured via countermovement, drop and/or squat jump.
The null line represents no correlation, with data presented to the left representing a negative correlation and to the right representing a positive correlation. For studies with repeated performance tests, a numerical order after the reference is used and aligns with the order presented in Table 1.
Table 1.
Studies assessing the effect of lower, inter-limb asymmetries on bilateral jump performance (n = 130).
Fig 4.
Forest plot of the 37-transformed effect sizes across eight studies (n = 187) assessing the effect of inter-limb asymmetries on change of direction performance via 505, zigzag, L-drill or pro-agility tests.
The null line represents no correlation, with data presented to the left representing a negative correlation and to the right representing a positive correlation. For studies with repeated performance tests, a numerical order after the reference is used and aligns with the order presented in Table 2.
Table 2.
Studies assessing the effect on lower, inter-limb asymmetries on change of direction performance (n = 187).
Fig 5.
Forest plot of the 54-transformed effect sizes across nine studies (n = 211) assessing the effect of inter-limb asymmetries on sprint performance measured across 5 to 30-meters.
The null line represents no correlation, with data presented to the left representing a negative correlation and to the right representing a positive correlation. For studies with repeated performance tests, a numerical order after the reference is used and aligns with the order presented in Table 3.
Table 3.
Studies assessing the effect on lower, inter-limb asymmetries on sprint performance (n = 211).