Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38835409›Full record

ArticleInternational review of sport and exercise psychology2024

Resilience in sports: a multidisciplinary, dynamic, and personalized perspective.

Ruud J R Den Hartigh, L Rens A Meerhoff, Nico W Van Yperen, Niklas D Neumann, Jur J Brauers, Wouter G P Frencken, Ando Emerencia, Yannick Hill, Sebastiaan Platvoet, Martin Atzmueller and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International review of sport and exercise psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  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

12 authors.

Ruud J R Den HartighFaculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0094-8307
L Rens A MeerhoffLeiden Institute of Advanced Computer Sciences (LIACS), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4386-0919
Nico W Van YperenFaculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Niklas D NeumannFaculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Jur J BrauersCenter for Human Movement Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1717-4977
Wouter G P FrenckenCenter for Human Movement Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Ando EmerenciaFaculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Department of Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Yannick HillInstitute for Sport and Sport Science, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Sebastiaan PlatvoetSchool of Sport and Exercise, HAN University of Applied Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Martin AtzmuellerSemantic Information Systems Group, Institute of Computer Science, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany.
Koen A P M LemminkCenter for Human Movement Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Michel S BrinkCenter for Human Movement Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0730-1979

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Athletes are exposed to various psychological and physiological stressors, such as losing matches and high training loads. Understanding and improving the resilience of athletes is therefore crucial to prevent performance decrements and psychological or physical problems. In this review, resilience is conceptualized as a dynamic process of bouncing back to normal functioning following stressors. This process has been of wide interest in psychology, but also in the physiology and sports science literature (e.g. load and recovery). To improve our understanding of the process of resilience, we argue for a collaborative synthesis of knowledge from the domains of psychology, physiology, sports science, and data science. Accordingly, we propose a multidisciplinary, dynamic, and personalized research agenda on resilience. We explain how new technologies and data science applications are important future trends (1) to detect warning signals for resilience losses in (combinations of) psychological and physiological changes, and (2) to provide athletes and their coaches with personalized feedback about athletes' resilience.

Indexed as

Data scienceload and recoverypersonalized feedbackstressorstime series

Identifiers

PMID38835409
PMCPMC11147456

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.