Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34305741›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

Systematic vs. Narrative Reviews in Sport and Exercise Psychology: Is Either Approach Superior to the Other?

Philip Furley, Nadav Goldschmied

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Sensory translation between audition and vision.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Ongoing Bidirectional Feedback between Planning and Assessment in Educational Contexts: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Philip FurleyInstitute for Training and Computer Science in Sport, German Sport University, Cologne, Germany.
Nadav GoldschmiedDepartment of Psychological Sciences, University of San Diego, San Diego, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Cochranecritical reviewliterature reviewPRISMAsecondary literature

Identifiers

PMID34305741
PMCPMC8299000

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.