ReviewJournal of human kinetics2026
Psychomotor and Basic Cognitive Abilities in Professional Athletes: A Systematic Review.
Review in Journal of human kinetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acute Effects of Guarana (Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Seasonal Changes in Psychomotor Abilities of Male Handball Players.Brain sciences · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are several ways to describe psychomotor and cognitive abilities in the context of sport performance, including psychomotor abilities, cognitive functioning, perceptual-cognitive skills, exercise-cognition, and motor-cognitive abilities. This review aimed to identify methods for measuring the aforementioned concepts within the context of relevant terminology. Studies examining psychomotor performance, as well as attentional, perceptual, and visual processes, were selected from three online databases: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Twenty-eight (28) studies were included in the review. The results were divided into sample characteristics and methodological details, including nomenclature specific to performance, methods, and outcomes. The studies were also categorised in the context of comparisons by the competitive level, sex and sport. Analysis showed that the most frequent basis of comparison included athletic performance. Computer-based methods occurred with the greatest frequency across all sport disciplines. Outcomes were typically reported in milliseconds, focusing on reaction time or accuracy. There was no consistency in the presentation of performance nomenclature and performance procedure. Addressing the selection and description of methods is relevant as it can contribute to a more effective research intervention design.
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.