ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Do strategically demanding sports shape hand function alike? Distinct profiles of dexterity and grip strength in basketball and badminton athletes.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
Purpose: Long-term participation in strategic sports may enhance hand dexterity and cognitive function, but sport-specific differences in manual control, force production, and cognition remain unclear. This study compared hand dexterity, grip strength, and cognitive performance among basketball athletes, badminton athletes, and non-athletes. Methods: This cross-sectional observational study included 90 right-handed participants (6 females, 84 males; mean age 20.57 ± 1.64 years) divided into the basketball athlete group (BAG), badminton athlete group (BmAG), and non-athlete controls (NCG). Participants completed the Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT), Grooved Pegboard Test (GPT), handgrip strength test (HD), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Stroop Color-Word Test (SCWT). Results: Both BAG and BmAG outperformed NCG in PPT dominant-hand scores, combined task scores, GPT completion speed, MoCA scores, and SCWT word reading (all P < 0.05). BmAG also showed superior PPT non-dominant-hand performance, bimanual coordination, and total scores compared with NCG, and better bimanual coordination than BAG (BmAG vs. NCG: P < 0.001, d = 0.96; BmAG vs. BAG: P = 0.033, d = 0.66). BAG demonstrated greater dominant-hand grip strength than NCG (P = 0.007, d = 0.90), whereas BmAG did not. No group differences were found in SCWT inhibitory control or cognitive flexibility. Conclusion: Badminton participation was associated with superior fine motor control and bimanual coordination, whereas basketball participation was associated with greater dominant-hand grip strength. Both athletic groups showed better selected manual and cognitive outcomes than NCG. However, the cross-sectional, male-skewed sample cannot establish causality, and the MoCA findings should be interpreted cautiously because of its ceiling effect in healthy young participants. Longitudinal or intervention studies are warranted. After Holm-Bonferroni correction for multiple outcomes, the group effects for PPT non-dominant-hand performance, dominant-hand grip strength, and Stroop word reading did not remain significant and are therefore interpreted as exploratory.
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.