ArticlePloS one2021
A comparison of multidimensional qualities discriminant of selection in elite adolescent Australian basketball athletes.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring mental functions utilised by male youth team-based ball-sport athletes within academy programs: a systematic review and meta-aggregation.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Pooled it
- Evidence-Based Insights for the Development and Talent Promotion of Young Athletes in a National Sports Context.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Article
- Influence of Jump and Ball Release Parameters on Shooting Accuracy in Basketball Under Varying Constraints.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Investigating coaches' general beliefs on defining and identifying talent in basketball.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Talent selection in 3 × 3 basketball: role of anthropometrics, maturation, and motor performance.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2024Article
- Anthropometry and Physical Performance in 13-Year-Old Australian Talent-Identified Male and Female Athletes Compared to an Age-Matched General Population Cohort.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Basketball talent identification: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the anthropometric, physiological and physical performance factors.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2023Review
- Elite Adolescent Ice Hockey Players: Analyzing Associations between Anthropometry, Fitness, and On-Ice Performance.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aims of this study were to (1) quantify the multidimensional attributes of male and female basketball athletes under 16 years of age (U16) and under 18 years of age (U18), and (2) identify attributes that distinguish selection into a talent pathway according to sex and age group.
methods67 male and 71 female athletes competing in U16 and U18 selection trials for a state based Australian basketball talent pathway completed a multidimensional testing battery. The test battery consisted of anthropometric, physical (20- linear sprint, countermovement jump height, Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 2), technical (Basketball Jump Shooting Accuracy Test), tactical (video decision making), and psychological (Sports Orientation Questionnaire, Psychological Performance Inventory-Alternative) assessments. Mean differences and independent t-tests were used to assess comparative differences between selected and non-selected athletes within each age and sex cohort. Stepwise discriminant analyses were used to identify attributes that were the strongest discriminators of selection in each group (male U16, male U18, female U16, and female U18).
resultsThe discrimminant models showed for male U16 athletes smaller height (ES = -0.18) and greater shooting accuracy (ES = 0.52) was most discriminant of selection. Results were largely homogenous for male U18 athletes with lower visualisation score (ES = -0.62) most discriminant of selection. In female cohorts, faster 20-m sprint time (ES = -0.66) and taller height (ES = 0.58) was most discriminant of selection in U16 athletes while greater shooting accuracy (ES = 0.67), countermovement jump height (ES = 1.04), and height (ES = 0.65) was most discriminant of selection in U18 athletes.
conclusionsThese results emphasise the differing selection priorities within adolescent basketball cohorts according to sex and age group. The testing of anthropometric, physical and technical attributes may hold particular utility in adolescent female basketball given their identified importance to selection across U16 and U18 cohorts.
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.