Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42639525›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2026

Chinese primary school physical education teachers' ongoing training and professional competence: an evidence mapping review and a hypothesis-generating conceptual framework.

Heng Li, Bing Shi

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Heng LiSchool of Teacher Development, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an, China.
Bing ShiPhysical Education School, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi'an, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ongoing training has gained increasing research attention as a means to improve the professional competencies of Chinese primary school physical education (PE) teachers. However, prior reviews have largely focused on general teachers, secondary teachers, or other subjects, leaving primary school PE teachers under-researched. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, we systematically searched Web of Science and Scopus, identifying 29 peer-reviewed studies. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), and findings were synthesized thematically. Critically, no included study directly targeted Chinese primary school PE teachers, revealing a fundamental evidence gap. Thematic synthesis of indirect evidence from adjacent populations, including general primary teachers, secondary teachers, teachers of other subjects, and non-Chinese contexts, identified four competency dimensions that may be influenced by ongoing training, namely instructional design, professional knowledge, teaching practice, and self-efficacy. Given the complete absence of direct evidence, all conclusions drawn for the target population are explicitly hypothesis-generating rather than confirmatory. Based on these indirect findings, we tentatively propose a testable chain mediation model in which ongoing training may sequentially influence professional knowledge, teaching practice, self-efficacy, and ultimately professional competence, offering a potential framework to guide future empirical investigations. This mini-review contributes an evidence map for this under-researched population and provides a heuristic conceptual framework to inform future research designs.

Indexed as

ongoing trainingphysical educationprimary teachersprofessional competenceprofessional development

Identifiers

PMID42639525
PMCPMC13502122

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.