ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2026
A qualitative programme evaluation of New Era, a mentorship programme for women leaders in sport.
Article 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Despite the increase in women's participation in sport, women remain underrepresented in leadership roles across the global sport landscape. In response, governments and sport organisations have developed Women's Leadership Programs (WLPs) to foster women's development in sports leadership. Although these initiatives aim to strengthen women's confidence and leadership capabilities, existing evaluations often focus on programme structure rather than the relational processes through which women navigate, adapt to, and challenge gendered sport systems. This study examines one such WLP: New Era (SportsPro), a 12-month global programme integrating mentoring, leadership development, visibility opportunities, and community-building for women and non-binary sport executives and emerging leaders. Methods: A qualitative research design was employed using semi-structured interviews with 21 participants, including 13 programme alumni and eight Steering Group members. Data were analysed using thematic content analysis, combining manual and AI-assisted coding. Results: Findings were organised across (1) programme development and engagement, which captured the evolution of New Era, participants' motivations for engaging, and the logistical and organisational conditions shaping participation. And (2) processes and perceived impacts of New Era, which captured the relational, personal, and industry-level experiences associated with participation. Across these points, participants described New Era as a relationally rich programme that supported visibility, expanded networks, personal brand development, leadership identity, and career progression. However, geographical barriers, uneven engagement, and ambiguity around programme goals constrained participation and raised questions about how to evaluate longer-term impact. Discussion: New Era illustrates the potential of relational, identity-based, and visibility-oriented leadership development to support women's leadership journeys in sport. Its contribution lies not only in individual development but in creating conditions for connection, recognition, and collective influence. However, broader organisational and sector-level impacts were harder to evidence or attribute directly to the programme. Future evaluations should adopt longitudinal and multi-level designs to assess whether perceived benefits translate into sustained career progression and organisational change across sport leadership.
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.