Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25015477›Full record

ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2014

Conventional and genetic talent identification in sports: will recent developments trace talent?

Sarah Breitbach, Suzan Tug, Perikles Simon

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Talent Identification in Sport: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Bounded Rationality and Heuristics: Do We Only Need to Score in Order to Win Individual Awards in Basketball?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sarah Breitbach
Suzan Tug
Perikles Simon

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of talent identification (TI) is the earliest possible selection of auspicious athletes with the goal of systematically maximizing their potential. The literature proposes excellent reviews on various facets of talent research on different scientific issues such as sports sciences or genetics. However, the approaches of conventional and genetic testing have only been discussed separately by and for the respective groups of interest. In this article, we combine the discoveries of these disciplines into a single review to provide a comprehensive overview and elucidate the prevailing limitations. Fundamental problems in TI reside in the difficulties of defining the construct ‘talent’ or groups of different performance levels that represent the target variable of testing. Conventional and genetic testing reveal a number of methodological and technical limitations, and parallels are summarised in terms of the test designs, the point in time of testing, psychological skills or traits and unknown interactions between different variables. In conclusion, many deficiencies in the current talent research have gained attention. Alternative solutions include the talent development approach, while genetic testing is re-emphasised as a tool for risk stratification in sport participation. Future research needs to clearly define the group of interest and comprehensively implement all methodological improvement suggestions.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingAge FactorsAnthropometryAptitudeAthletesAthletic PerformanceGenetic MarkersHumansPersonalityPersonnel SelectionPolymorphism, GeneticSelf EfficacySportsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID25015477

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.