SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
Effects of Physical Training Interventions on Golf Shot Performance: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPhysical training is widely used in golf to improve club head speed and distance-related outcomes, but intervention evidence across key shot-performance outcomes has not been synthesized with separate treatment of controlled and single-group designs.
objectiveWe aimed to evaluate the effects of physical training interventions on club head speed, ball speed, carry distance, and total distance in golfers.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Google Scholar were searched on 3 March, 2026. Eligible studies included golfers of any sex, age, or playing level; evaluated a physical training intervention lasting at least 4 weeks; used either a controlled between-group or single-group pre-post design; and reported golf shot-performance outcomes. Random-effects meta-analyses synthesized absolute effects in common units, with controlled and single-group evidence analyzed separately.
resultsThirty-three studies comprising 798 participants met the eligibility criteria, including 26 controlled between-group studies and 7 single-group pre-post studies. Controlled meta-analyses showed significant pooled improvements in club head speed, ball speed, carry distance, and total distance: 1.05 m/s (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-1.71), 2.20 m/s (95% CI 1.16-3.23), 9.33 m (95% CI 5.12-13.55), and 10.55 m (95% CI 6.30-14.81), respectively. The corresponding pooled standardized effects ranged from g = 0.38 to 0.62. Single-group meta-analyses showed significant pooled improvements in club head speed, ball speed, and carry distance, but not in total distance in the primary analysis. The certainty of evidence was low for all controlled outcomes and very low for all single-group outcomes.
conclusionsPhysical training interventions can improve key golf shot-performance outcomes in golfers, with controlled between-group studies providing the most robust evidence. Structured physical training therefore appears to represent a meaningful component of golf performance preparation. Nonetheless, more comprehensively reported and population-specific intervention studies are needed.
Identifiers
42658467What 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.