Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32403272›Full record

SynthesisInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

The Application of the Teaching Games for Understanding in Physical Education. Systematic Review of the Last Six Years.

Raúl A Barba-Martín, Daniel Bores-García, David Hortigüela-Alcalá, Gustavo González-Calvo

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Multiteaching style and active reflection for swimming.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. News of the Pedagogical Models in Physical Education-A Quick Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  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

4 authors.

Raúl A Barba-MartínDepartment of Didactics of Musical, Artistic and Body Expression, Faculty of Education of Segovia, University of Valladolid, 40011 Segovia, Spain.
Daniel Bores-GarcíaDepartment of Physical Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Rey Juan Carlos University, 28922 Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain.
David Hortigüela-AlcaláDepartment of Specific Didactics, Faculty of Education, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5951-758X
Gustavo González-CalvoDepartment of Didactics of Musical, Artistic and Body Expression, Faculty of Education of Palencia, University of Valladolid, 34004 Palencia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A systematic review of the research conducted on Teaching Games for Understanding in Physical Education in the last six years (2014-2019), updating and expanding with new categories the last published review by Harvey and Jarret in 2014. Four databases were used to select those articles that included information on the implementation of Teaching Games for Understanding in different educational stages. According to PRISMA guidelines and including the PICO strategy after the exclusion criteria, 12 articles were fully assessed based on eight criteria: (1) year and author; (2) country; (3) number of participants, educational level, and duration of implementation; (4) type of research; (5) curricular content; (6) purpose of the research; (7) most relevant results; and (8) learning environment. The results showed how research focuses on both primary and secondary education, primarily in short-term interventions. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed research is used almost equally, and dealt evenly with sports and games, leaving motor skills, physical abilities and body expression underrepresented. Regarding the goals of the studies, motor and cognitive learning were the most frequently assessed, focusing on improvement of game development, such as tactical aspects, decision-making, technical skills or level of physical activity. The implementation of the model is carried out in too short a time to achieve significant outcomes. This review can help researchers and practitioners conduct Teaching Games for Understanding intervention programs in primary and secondary Physical Education. They must be rigorous when they claim that they implement this pedagogical model in schools.

Indexed as

Games, RecreationalAdolescentChildFemaleHumansLearningMaleMotor SkillsPhysical Education and TrainingSportsTeachingeducational researchpedagogical modelssystematic reviewTeaching Games for Understanding

Identifiers

PMID32403272
PMCPMC7246645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.