ArticlePloS one2026
The comparative analysis of Sino-Japanese football policies from the perspective of policy instruments.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Football development depends heavily on strong policy support, rendering policy analysis and evaluation of significant practical importance. This study uses Nvivo11 software and the PMC index model to conduct a quantitative comparative analysis of 31 Sino-Japanese football policy texts, focusing on policy instruments, content characteristics, and overall quality. The findings reveal that both countries prioritize football development, social participation, and club construction; China emphasizes campus football, while Japan focuses on elite player development and league performance. PMC evaluation indicates that Chinese policies score higher in system design and institutional capacity, whereas Japan performs better in implementation clarity and community linkage. Both countries share shortcomings in insufficient policy clarity and vague long-term competitive goals. The research results provide empirical evidence for the optimization of Chinese football policies and a reference for drawing on international experience.
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.