ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
The effects of stroboscopic vision training on sports vision ability performance and punching performance in female boxers.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stroboscopic training uses intermittent visual occlusion to disrupt continuous visual information flow, inducing adaptive improvements in visuomotor processing. Although its efficacy has been demonstrated across several fast-response sports, its application in boxing - particularly among female athletes - remains largely unexplored. This study investigated the effects of a six-week stroboscopic training program on visual performance skills and punching accuracy in female amateur (Olympic-style) boxers, and examined the durability of training effects at a four-week follow-up. Methods: Twenty-six female amateur boxers (mean age 24.69 ± 5.48 years; mean boxing experience 7.19 ± 2.51 years) were randomly assigned to a stroboscopic training group (n = 13) or a non-stroboscopic control group (n = 13). Visual performance was assessed across 10 metrics using the Senaptec Sensory Station at pre-test, post-test, and retention. Punching accuracy (%Hit) was assessed from video recordings of official bouts and formal intra-team sparring sessions. The six-week intervention consisted of three 35-minute sessions per week combining general visual reaction drills and boxing-specific reactive tasks, performed under stroboscopic or normal visual conditions. Results: Significant group × assessment phase interactions were observed for five visual performance metrics: Eye-Hand Coordination (EHC; F(2,48) = 6.105, p = 0.004, ηp² = 0.203), Reaction Time (RT; F(2,48) = 3.230, p = 0.048, ηp² = 0.119), Go/No-Go (GNG; F(2,48) = 4.807, p = 0.013, ηp² = 0.167), Perception Span (PS; F(2,48) = 6.005, p = 0.005, ηp² = 0.200), and Multiple Object Tracking (MOT; F(2,48) = 6.039, p = 0.005, ηp² = 0.201). Punching accuracy also improved significantly (F(2,48) = 4.626, p = 0.015, ηp² = 0.162), with post-test %Hit (35.02 ± 7.27%) significantly higher than pre-test (28.85 ± 7.45%). Training effects on EHC, GNG, PS, and MOT were partially retained at the four-week follow-up; RT and %Hit improvements were not retained. No significant changes were observed for basic visual functions (VC, CS, DP, TC, NFQ) in either group. Conclusions: Six weeks of stroboscopic training significantly improved key visuomotor skills and punching accuracy in female amateur boxers, with partial retention of effects four weeks post-intervention. These findings support the integration of stroboscopic training into evidence-based boxing preparation programs and highlight the need for periodic booster sessions to sustain long-term gains.
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.