ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
When digital tracking helps or hinders: unpacking the heterogeneous effects of activity trackers on adolescent athletes through the lens of motivation and acceptance.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Digital activity trackers have become popular in youth training, but the evidence of their effectiveness is mixed. Most of the existing studies rely on the average effect model, ignoring the individual differences in the effect of equipment use and the psychological mechanism behind it. Objective: The purpose of this study is to explore the heterogeneous dose-response relationship between the objective use of trackers and the improvement of performance in young football players, and to analyze the mediating role of training load and the moderating role of psychological acceptance and initial physical fitness. Methods: The study followed 142 young male football players from 12 youth academies for 12 weeks. We integrated multiple sources of data, including objective usage data recorded by the device (cumulative duration/frequency), performance improvement data (ΔYo-Yo interval recovery test scores), training load data (based on RPE scores), and psychological acceptance data (based on the TAM questionnaire). The quantile regression model was used to analyze the role of each factor under different levels of performance improvement ( Results: There was significant heterogeneity in the association: the association between cumulative duration of use and performance improvement was strongest at the low quantile ( Conclusion: The association between tracker use and performance varied significantly among individuals. The potential benefits were most significant for athletes with lower initial fitness levels and higher psychological acceptance, achieved in part through increased training loads. Practice requires personalized application. Due to the observational study design, no causal relationship can be inferred from these findings.
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.