ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2026
Differences in cognitive shifts and prefrontal activation among athletes with different motor skills: an fNIRS study.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the effects of different motor skills (open and closed) on the cognitive switching function and hemodynamic response characteristics of the prefrontal cortex in male athletes, providing a neurocognitive basis for the scientific selection of high-level athletes and the development of personalized cross-training programs. Methods: This study recruited a total of 31 male Level 2 athletes, who were divided into an open-skill group ( Results: 1. Behavioral Results: Although there were no significant differences in overall accuracy or reaction time between the two groups, the interaction effect between group and condition was significant for reaction time. Under the premise of equal accuracy, the reaction time conversion cost of the open skill group (126.26 ± 92.26 ms) was significantly lower than that of the closed skill group (230.72 ± 143.03 ms), indicating higher cognitive conversion efficiency.2. HbO₂ Activation Results: During the cognitive conversion task, compared with the open skill group, the closed skill group had significantly higher HbO2 activation levels in the DLPFC ( Conclusion: Long-term open-skill training in dynamic, unpredictable contexts may enhance athletes' cognitive flexibility and promote more efficient cortical resource allocation in critical cognitive control regions (DLPFC, FPC, and OFC). This study empirically validates the "neural efficiency hypothesis" and the "broad transfer hypothesis" from a neuroimaging standpoint. This study preliminarily indicates that moderate integration of open-skill cross-training into closed-skill programs may optimize the executive control network; however, the actual advantages of this method require validation through future extensive longitudinal intervention studies.
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.