SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
Interventions for developing selective and sustained attention in adolescent athletes: a scoping review.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Selective and sustained attention are key cognitive functions associated with athletic performance and represent trainable abilities during adolescence. Although various intervention approaches have been investigated to enhance attention in young athletes, the available evidence has not been comprehensively mapped. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review was to identify and map the available interventions designed to develop selective and sustained attention among adolescent athletes and to summarize their characteristics, assessment methods, and reported outcomes. Methods: The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. The research question was developed using the Population-Concept-Context (PCC) framework. A systematic search of six electronic databases (ScienceDirect, ProQuest, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EBSCOhost) was conducted in December 2025. Data were extracted using Microsoft Excel and synthesized narratively. Results: Six studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising 393 participants. Among the 367 participants for whom sex/gender was reported, 170 (46.3%) were female. The included studies primarily focused on adolescent athletes aged 11-20 years; one study included a broader age range, although its intervention group corresponded to the target adolescent population. The identified interventions included cognitive training, cognitive-motor dual-task training, mindfulness-based interventions, perceptual-cognitive training, and sport-specific approaches targeting selective and/or sustained attention. A variety of assessment instruments and measurement methods were used to evaluate attention-related and other cognitive outcomes. Most studies reported improvements in selective and/or sustained attention following the interventions; however, substantial heterogeneity in intervention characteristics, outcome measures, and study designs limited direct comparisons across studies. Discussion: The available evidence indicates that several intervention approaches have been explored for developing selective and sustained attention in adolescent athletes. However, the small number of studies and considerable methodological heterogeneity preclude firm conclusions regarding intervention effectiveness. Future research should prioritize well-designed intervention studies with larger samples, standardized intervention protocols, and more consistent attention assessment methods.
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.