Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33597630›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Differences in inhibitory control and motor fitness in children practicing open and closed skill sports.

Damiano Formenti, Athos Trecroci, Marco Duca, Luca Cavaggioni, Fabio D'Angelo, Alberto Passi, Stefano Longo, Giampietro Alberti

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
14.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Damiano Formenti *Department of Biotechnology and Life Sciences (DBSV), University of Insubria, via Dunant 3, 21100, Varese, Italy.
Athos Trecroci *Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Via Kramer 4/A, 20129, Milan, Italy. athos.trecroci@unimi.it.
Marco DucaDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Via Kramer 4/A, 20129, Milan, Italy.
Luca CavaggioniDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Via Kramer 4/A, 20129, Milan, Italy.
Fabio D'AngeloDepartment of Biotechnology and Life Sciences (DBSV), University of Insubria, via Dunant 3, 21100, Varese, Italy.
Alberto PassiDepartment of Medicine and Surgery (DMC), University of Insubria, via Dunant 5, 21100, Varese, Italy.
Stefano LongoDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Via Kramer 4/A, 20129, Milan, Italy.
Giampietro AlbertiDepartment of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università Degli Studi Di Milano, Via Kramer 4/A, 20129, Milan, Italy.
University of Milan · ITUniversity of Insubria · ITIRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate the differences between types of sport (i.e., closed vs. open skills sport) on inhibitory control and motor fitness in children. Forty-nine children were allocated into three groups based on their sports participation, which comprised an open skill sport group, a closed skill sport group, and a sedentary group. Participants were tested on cognitive performance (inhibitory control by the Flanker task) and motor fitness (reaction time, speed, agility, power, balance). Open skill sport group appeared to display higher inhibitory control (response time and accuracy of incongruent condition of the Flanker task) and motor fitness performance (reaction time, speed, agility, power) than sedentary group, whereas its superiority over closed skill sport group was found only in speed and agility. Moreover, closed skill sport group had only a better reaction time than sedentary group. Our data supports the framework according to which cognitive demands in complex motor actions may contribute to explain the beneficial effects of exercise on inhibitory control. This might suggest that the complexity of the environment (typical in open skill sports) in which sport training is performed plays a key role for both cognitive and motor development in children.

Indexed as

Athletic PerformanceChildCognitionExerciseFemaleHumansMaleMotor SkillsReaction TimeSedentary BehaviorSports

Identifiers

PMID33597630
PMCPMC7889632
OpenAlexW3132286109

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.