Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42233069›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2026

The complexities of athlete development in North American professional sport.

Dale Lablans, Kathryn Johnston, Joseph Baker

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

3 authors.

Dale LablansSchool of Kinesiology and Health Science, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Kathryn JohnstonFaculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, Tanenbaum Institute for Science in Sport, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Joseph BakerFaculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, Tanenbaum Institute for Science in Sport, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the number of roles and positions within professional sport organizations dedicated to athlete development grows, coaches and other interest-holders continue to look to empirical evidence to guide their approaches and inform decision-making. Unfortunately, evidence to date is limited, leaving practitioners wondering how they can best support and make positive change in the athletes under their care, especially when these athletes are typically adults and at the most elite stages of their sporting careers. Using a narrative review approach, this work draws from areas within sport science including talent development, research methods, and athlete support to highlight some of the contemporary issues faced by practitioners in these roles. The main challenges identified include (a) definitional ambiguity, (b) measurement and analysis challenges, (c) restrictive theoretical modeling, and (d) implementation science barriers. Overall, based on the limited, high-quality, empirical evidence to date, decisions on what is "best" for professional athletes at this stage of their careers remains elusive. Caution should be taken when making assumptions, and applying a "one size fits all approach" for athlete development in early adulthood.

Indexed as

athlete supportathlete transitionscareer progressionelite athleteshigh performance sport

Identifiers

PMID42233069
PMCPMC13225721

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.