ArticlePloS one2022
Whole-body sensorimotor skill learning in football players: No evidence for motor transfer effects.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Besides simple movement sequences, precise whole-body motor sequences are fundamental for top athletic performance. It has long been questioned whether athletes have an advantage when learning new whole-body motor sequences. In a previous study, we did not find any superior learning or transfer effects of strength and endurance athletes in a complex whole-body serial reaction time task (CWB-SRTT). In the present study, we aimed to extend this research by increasing the overlap of task requirements between CWB-SRTT and a specific sports discipline. For this purpose, we assessed differences between football players and non-athletes during motor sequence learning using CWB-SRTT. 15 non-athletes (CG) and 16 football players (FG) performed the CWB-SRTT over 2 days separated by one week. Median reaction times and movement times were analyzed as well as differences in sequence-specific CWB-SRTT learning rates and retention. Our findings did not reveal any differences in sequence-specific or non-sequence-specific improvement, nor retention rates between CG and FG. We speculate that this might relate to a predominately cognitive-induced learning effect during CWB-SRTT which negates the assumed motor advantage of the football players.
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.