Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39958766›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025

Goal and shot prediction in ball possessions in FIFA Women's World Cup 2023: a machine learning approach.

Iyán Iván-Baragaño, Antonio Ardá, José L Losada, Rubén Maneiro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

4 authors.

Iyán Iván-BaragañoDepartment of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Sports, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Antonio ArdáDepartment of Physical and Sport Education, University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain.
José L LosadaDepartment of Social Psychology and Quantitative Phycology, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Rubén ManeiroFaculty of Education and Sport, University of Vigo, Vigo, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Research in women's football and the use of new game analysis tools have developed significantly in recent years. The objectives of this study were to create two predictive classification models to forecast the occurrence of a shot or a goal in the FIFA Women's World Cup 2023 and to identify the associated technical-tactical indicators to these outcomes. Methods: A total of 2,346 ball possessions were analyzed using an observational design, mapping two different target variables (Success = Goal and Success2 = Goal or Shot) with a relative frequency of 1.28 and 8.35%, respectively. The predictive capacity was tested using Random Forest and XGBoost and finally and SHAP values were calculated and visualized to understand the influence of the predictors. Results: Random Forest technique showed greater efficacy, with recall and sensitivity above 93% in the resampled dataset. However, recall on the original test sample was 13% (Success = Shot or Goal) and 0% (Success = Goal), demonstrating the models' inability to predict rare events in football, such as goals. The indicators with the greatest influence on the outcome of these possessions were related to the possession zone, attack duration, number of passes, and starting zone, among others. Conclusion: The results highlight the need to incorporate a greater number of predictive variables in the models and underline the difficulty of predicting events such as goals and shots in women's football.

Indexed as

female footballFIFA Women’s World Cup 2023machine learningperformance analysispredictive modelswomen’s soccer

Identifiers

PMID39958766
PMCPMC11825459

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.