Trial reportPeerJ2026
Effects of physical activity distribution patterns on basketball skill acquisition and physical exercise self-efficacy among Chinese male university students: a randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in PeerJ, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: As an open-skills sport, basketball not only enhances university students' physical fitness and specialised techniques but also influences their technical learning efficiency and exercise self-efficacy through patterns of physical activity distribution. However, empirical research on the mechanisms underlying the effects of physical activity distribution patterns on basketball technical performance and self-efficacy remains limited. Objective: This study aims to investigate the impact of two distinct physical activity patterns (massed Method: A randomised controlled trial design was employed, enrolling 105 male university students aged 18-25 years. The participants were randomly assigned to either a massed training group or a regularly distributed training group. Both interventions lasted 8 weeks, followed by a 2-month follow-up period. Training volume and intensity were maintained at equivalent levels, differing solely in the distribution of practice sessions. Basketball skill acquisition was assessed through shooting accuracy, dribbling agility, and passing precision, whereas psychological efficacy was measured via the Revised Self-Efficacy Scale for Physical Exercise. Generalised estimating equation (GEE) and simple effects analyses were employed to examine between-group and within-group differences, controlling for potential confounding factors. Results: The findings indicate that the regularly distributed training group demonstrated significantly greater improvements than did the massed training group in shooting (odds ratio (OR) = 2.316, Conclusion: A regularly distributed physical activity pattern has greater advantages in promoting basketball-specific skills (particularly shooting and passing) and physical exercise self-efficacy. This suggests that basketball training programmes should prioritise optimising practice distribution to increase skill acquisition quality and sustain long-term exercise motivation. Future research may extend to different gender and age groups while incorporating game performance metrics to further validate the efficacy of distributed practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.