SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
Effects of imagery practice on basketball-related skills and psychological outcomes: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Imagery practice is widely used in basketball training. Its effects on basketball-related skill and psychological outcomes remain uncertain because most trials are small and assess heterogeneous outcomes. Objective: This meta-analysis examined the effects of imagery practice on basketball-related skill and psychological outcomes. Methods: Randomized controlled trials were included when they compared imagery practice with usual training or a control condition without imagery. Hedges' g was calculated from change scores. Positive values indicated better outcomes after imagery practice. Bayesian multilevel models were used to account for dependent effect sizes arising from multiple outcomes, intervention arms, or testing conditions within the same study, thereby reducing the risk of inflated precision when clustered sport-imagery effects are treated as independent. Outcome subgroup analyses, population subgroup analyses, duration models, publication bias tests, model diagnostics, and GRADE assessment were conducted. Results: The analysis included 39 effect sizes from 14 study units. Across basketball-related skill and psychological outcomes, imagery practice showed a positive overall effect, Hedges' g, 1.08, 95% HDI, 0.65 to 1.52, BF10, 317.67. The clearest outcome evidence was found for free throw performance, Hedges' g, 0.89, 95% HDI, 0.38 to 1.40, BF10, 13.85. Positive effects were also estimated for motor coordination control and self-efficacy, but these outcomes were based on fewer studies. Evidence was imprecise for basketball shooting accuracy, free throw performance under time pressure, and three point shooting because the 95% HDI crossed zero. Egger regression suggested small study effects. Model diagnostics were acceptable, with Rhat values close to 1.00. Conclusion: Imagery practice may improve basketball-related outcomes, with the most defensible evidence observed for free throw performance. Evidence for motor coordination/control and self-efficacy should be interpreted as secondary and indirect support rather than direct evidence of basketball skill improvement. Current evidence remains limited by small samples, clustered effects, and possible small-study effects. Future trials should use larger samples, clearer allocation methods, and standardized basketball skill outcomes. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261389048.
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.