SynthesisFrontiers in sports and active living2025
Learning how to swim in 5- to 12-year-old children: a scoping review of evidence-based motor learning methods.
Synthesis 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- The teaching swimming for understanding framework: an integrated approach to aquatic education for children and instructors.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Impact of assistive tool-based training on anxiety, mental focus, and self-confidence among university swimming students.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Multiteaching style and active reflection for swimming.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
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
Background: Swimming is widely acknowledged for its safety and health benefits. Across the world children are receiving swimming lessons in which a variety of learning methods are employed. However, little is known about the effectiveness of those methods, and a comprehensive overview of pertinent research is lacking. Such an overview is needed for both researchers and instructors seeking to improve swimming skill acquisition in children. Objective: This scoping review aims to provide an overview of studies examining the effectiveness of motor learning methods for the acquisition of swimming skills by 5- to 12-year-old children, including an evaluation of their theoretical underpinnings, methodological quality, and core findings. Methods: This scoping review adhered to the PRISMA guidelines and followed Tricco et al.'s framework for conducting and reporting scoping reviews. Five bibliographic databases were systematically searched. Peer-reviewed studies in all languages published before 2025 were considered. Studies focusing on children with water-related fear were included. Gray literature, non-peer-reviewed studies and studies on specific groups (e.g., young, competitive swimmers or children with disabilities), or cognitive/motivational outcomes were excluded. Review selection and characterization were performed by three independent reviewers using pretested forms. Results: A total of 23 studies were included, which were classified into three main categories: traditional motor learning methods ( Conclusion: The literature on this topic is scarce, generally atheoretical and of questionable methodological quality. Addressing these shortcomings in future research will improve the evidence-base for the effectiveness of theoretically inspired learning methods for the acquisition of swimming skills in children, and their long-term retention and transfer, which in turn might result in evidence-based innovations in swimming lessons. Systematic Review Registration: PRISMA (RRID:SCR_018721).
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.