Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39981508›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2025

Policy analysis in sport: a review of mainstream meso-level frameworks and developing more sustainable policy for grassroots sport.

Charles Mountifield

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

1 author.

Charles MountifieldFaculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper reviews some mainstream meso-level policy analysis frameworks widely applied in sport. There is, however, an absence of consensus for an established framework for analysing sport policy in general and, instead, techniques emanating from other fields of study have been relied upon. The resultant approach to sport policy analysis is inconsistent, multidimensional, and lacks unanimity, leading to calls for a sport-specific framework. This research outlines how meso-level frameworks have been applied in sport policy and issues linked to sustainability from a grassroots policy perspective. A narrative literature review provides an overview of prevalent approaches, namely Institutional Analysis, the Multiple Streams Framework, Policy Network Theory, and the Advocacy Coalition Framework. Aspects of applying these models to sport policy-including some key advantages and disadvantages-are outlined, especially the issue of conventional top-policy processes, the impact on policy implementers at grassroots level, and the potential for bottom-up policy influence. The article examines the four frameworks in the context of praxes in sport, noting the overall importance of a meso-level approach to sport policy analysis and that arriving at an holistic and inclusive accord has merit.

Indexed as

bottom-upimplementationpolicy frameworkssporttop-down

Identifiers

PMID39981508
PMCPMC11839806

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.