ReviewSpringerPlus2015
The controversy of sports technology: a systematic review.
Review in SpringerPlus, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the Efficacy of GameBreaker Softshell Headgear in Reducing Peak Head Kinematics.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Technological Doping in Sport: Performance Enhancement, Health, Ethics, and Regulatory Governance: A Narrative Synthesis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Electroceuticals for Paralympic Athletes: A Fair Play and Classification Concern?Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- From bad calls to system errors: accountability in automated and assisted sports officiating.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Sex differences in elite track and field performances and inferences about steroid doping.Experimental physiology · 2025Article
- The influence of the video assistant referee on the UEFA European Championship.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- The Effect of the Video Assistant Referee System Implementation on Match Physical Demands in the Spanish LaLiga.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- "Dear IOC": Considerations for the Governance, Valuation, and Evaluation of Trends and Developments in eSports.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2022Review
- Author's Reply to González-Mohíno et al. "A Pragmatic Approach to Resolving Technological Unfairness: The Case of Nike's Vaporfly and Alphafly Running Footwear".Sports medicine - open · 2021Article
- Technological innovations in the recreational fishing sector: implications for fisheries management and policy.Reviews in fish biology and fisheries · 2021Review
- A Pragmatic Approach to Resolving Technological Unfairness: the Case of Nike's Vaporfly and Alphafly Running Footwear.Sports medicine - open · 2020Article
- The Moral Gatekeeper: Soccer and Technology, the Case of Video Assistant Referee (VAR).Frontiers in psychology · 2020Review
- Age-Related Changes in Para and Wheelchair Racing Athlete's Performances.Frontiers in physiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Changes or introductions of technology or equipment can affect how a sport is played or influence its performances. This article conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature to identify any case studies of controversial events surrounding the implementation or use of sports technology. 56 articles were identified that highlighted 31 different case studies found over a three decade time period. Thematic analysis revealed six distinctive themes when reviewing the articles. Whilst the sport of golf had the highest number of case studies, it was found that a significant level of attention had been recorded in the cases of Oscar Pistorius use of prosthetic legs in athletics and the use of full length swimsuits in swimming. The trend surrounding the number of articles was shown to be initially intermittent but saw a peak period from 2008 to 2010. However, the frequency of such articles since this peak has been more consistent. It is proposed that long periods of time without intervention or resolution by a governing body often increases the peer-reviewed attention paid to such cases in examples such as those identified in this systematic review.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.