ReviewFrontiers in sports and active living2026
A governance process lens for evaluating local public sport facilities: a multi-level conceptual framework.
Review in Frontiers in sports and active living, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Local public sport facilities are not simply sites of infrastructure provision and service use. They are also shaped by governance through public steering, organizational mediation, and local decisions about resource allocation. Existing evaluation approaches remain fragmented. Studies often examine user experience, organizational performance, accessibility, or efficiency in relative isolation, with limited attention to how these concerns relate within local facility development. This study develops a multi-level conceptual framework for evaluating local public sport facilities through a governance process lens. The framework was derived through a structured conceptual synthesis of recurring strands in the literature and distinguishes three analytically distinct but operationally interdependent levels: community use, lived service experience, and user-valued outcomes at the micro level; organizational and managerial governance mechanisms at the meso level; and policy steering, resource allocation, accessibility, and system-level efficiency conditions at the macro level. Rather than proposing a universal scoring model, the framework provides an integrative architecture for understanding how these levels are related within the same public development process. It offers a governance-sensitive heuristic for future research, evaluation design, and local public steering.
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.