ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2026
Visual, visuomotor, and kinesthetic abilities in football players: their relationship with sport-specific performance and trainability.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Success in football (soccer) rests on physical and technical capacity and on the perceptual and sensorimotor systems that let players read the game, act quickly, and control the body and the ball. This review examines three linked ability domains: visual (the quality and use of visual input, from static and dynamic acuity to peripheral awareness, object tracking, and visual search), visuomotor (the coupling of perception to action, including reaction time, eye-foot coordination, and visually guided movement), and kinesthetic (proprioception, joint position sense, kinesthetic differentiation, and balance). For each domain we ask how it is measured, how it relates to match-relevant performance, and whether it can be trained. Football players generally outperform non-athletes, and several markers separate players by level, position, and age. Trainability is consistent for targeted laboratory measures across stroboscopic, light-based, augmented-feedback, perceptual-cognitive, and proprioceptive-coordinative programs, but transfer to on-field performance is weaker and less certain, and laboratory tests frequently fail to predict in-game behavior. We argue that the three domains form a single perception-action continuum rather than separate capacities, that assessment and training should represent real match demands, and that sex, limb dominance, maturation, fatigue, and injury status act as moderators. Adequately powered, field-validated trials remain the decisive next step. Practical implications for talent identification, monitoring, and training design are set out. The evidence base is drawn overwhelmingly from male players, so these conclusions apply to men's football unless otherwise stated.
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.