ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Coaching unified sports: associations between perceived athlete improvement, barriers, and coach attitudes across five European countries.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of self-efficacy and psychological well-being among coaches of athletes with and without disabilities: a comparative cross-sectional study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to examine how perceived athlete improvement, perceived barriers to implementation, and selected coaching characteristics are associated with coaches' attitudes toward Unified Sports programs. The investigation focused on understanding the psychological and contextual factors that influence inclusive coaching engagement within a multi-country sample, rather than comparing national differences directly. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 102 coaches involved in Unified Sports programs in five European countries. Participants completed a standardized questionnaire assessing their attitudes toward inclusion, perceived improvement in athletes with developmental disabilities and their non-disabled partners, perceived implementation barriers, and personal coaching background. Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to identify predictors of coaching attitudes. Results: Perceived improvement in athletes with developmental disabilities was the strongest and most consistent predictor of positive coaching attitudes. Coaches who reported greater perceived progress in these athletes were more likely to endorse inclusive beliefs. In contrast, perceived improvement in non-disabled partners, although generally rated highly, did not significantly predict coaching attitudes. Interestingly, coaches with prior experience working in disability sports and those with familial relationships to participating athletes expressed more skeptical views, suggesting that emotional involvement or cumulative exposure may introduce attitudinal strain. Although institutional, social, and logistical barriers to Unified Sports were widely recognized by participants, these factors did not independently predict attitudes once other variables were controlled for. Conclusion: The findings underscore the motivational role of observed progress among athletes with disabilities in shaping coach engagement and suggest that experiential factors such as previous involvement and personal ties may carry unanticipated emotional or structural challenges. These insights point to the importance of designing coach education and support programs that not only promote technical competence but also address emotional resilience and contextual demands. Strengthening these components may enhance the sustainability and effectiveness of Unified Sports initiatives worldwide.
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.