Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38188107›Full record

ArticleBiology of sport2024

Are EFI data valuable? Evidence from the 2022 FIFA World Cup group stage.

Xiaobin Wei, Yifan Zhao, Hui Chen, Peter Krustrup, Morten B Randers, Chong Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology of sport, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Xiaobin WeiSchool of Strength and Conditioning Training, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China.
Yifan ZhaoChina Institute of Sport Science, Beijing, China.
Hui ChenSchool of sports and health management, Chongqing University of Education, Chongqing, China.
Peter KrustrupDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, SDU Sport and Health Sciences Cluster, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Morten B RandersDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, SDU Sport and Health Sciences Cluster, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Chong ChenBeijing Research Institute of Sport Science, Beijing, China.
China Institute of Sport Science · CNBeijing Sport University · CNChongqing University of Education · CNUiT The Arctic University of Norway · NOUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The 2022 World Cup used new Enhanced Football Intelligence (EFI) data, stoppage time calculation methods and substitution rules that were introduced by FIFA. The aim of this study is to explore the effectiveness of EFI in match analysis and to identify the key indicators that influence the match and provide a reference for coaches' tactical design and training. Data were derived from the FIFA website, including EFI data for 48 matches at the group stage of the Qatar World Cup. A total of 46 indicators were used for analysis and the average values of the corresponding indicators for the different competition results were used in the analysis to identify the key index that determines the outcome of the competition. Apart from scoring more goals and having more assists, winning teams had significantly more attempts on target than drawing and losing teams (p < 0.05); Winning teams had significantly more attempts inside the penalty area, completed defensive line breaks and receptions behind the defensive line than losing teams (p < 0.05). There is no difference in possession between matches with different results (p > 0.05). Goals were significantly correlated with completed defensive line breaks and receptions behind the defensive line (r = 0.27-0.30, p < 0.01). Attempts on target was significantly positively correlated with receptions, final third entries and line breaks (r = 0.31-0.67, p < 0.01) and negatively correlated with defensive pressures applied (r = -0.35, p < 0.01). The efficiency of the offense is more important. Teams need to have more receptions, final third entries and line breaks to get more shots on target rather than possession. This study may help coaches to interpret the game from a multi-dimensional perspective and coaches can use EFI to help their teams improve their match performance.

Indexed as

Football Goal MetricsMatch analysisPerformance Soccer

Identifiers

PMID38188107
PMCPMC10765435
OpenAlexW4378893205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-SA
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.