Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41269499›Full record

ArticleSports medicine - open2025

Pushing your luck: on chance, serendipity, and athlete development.

Joseph Baker, Kathryn Johnston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sports medicine - open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Joseph BakerTanenbaum Institute for Science in Sport, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. joseph.baker@utoronto.ca.
Kathryn JohnstonTanenbaum Institute for Science in Sport, Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The notion that problems with prediction can be resolved with more, and better, data has a long history. In this paper, we examine the role of chance and randomness (i.e., events where there is a low probability of occurrence) in athlete development, focusing on the influence of 'luck' on this process. More specifically, we briefly summarize the way luck has been considered in previous research on human achievement and how different types of luck (i.e., luck related to elements of the task, the athlete development environment, and biological processes) can affect athlete development. In addition, the implications and challenges of embracing the influence of luck on models of athlete development are discussed. Acknowledging the role of luck may lead to developmental environments that are more equitable (e.g., by creating greater opportunities for more individuals to get lucky) and realistic (i.e., by acknowledging that predictions of sport- and athlete-related outcomes will never be perfect).

Indexed as

Athlete developmentAthlete forecastingAthlete performanceRandomnessSportTalent

Identifiers

PMID41269499
PMCPMC12638599

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.