Role of Sport Vision in Performance: Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport Vision is a speciality of multidisciplinary interest aimed at improving the performance of the visual system to achieve benefits in practiced sports, as well as in daily life and in preventive care. The type of training practiced by the athlete, his or her physical condition, cognitive level, and level of fatigue condition affects the speed of the reaction time and, consequently, the speed of motor response. Specific orthoptic exercises, the use of technological devices, the recovery of static and dynamic postural stability by using unstable platforms and the dual-task paradigm can help to achieve the expected results. The aim of this systematic review of Sport Vision was to assess the overall existing literature on Sport Vision, paying particular attention to the effects of visual training and its application in different sports and in rehabilitation and preventive settings. We analysed published English language studies about the role of sport vision in athletic performance from 1950 to 2023. We searched through the Medline database. The PRISMA 2020 checklist was used to assess the transparency and reproducibility of this review. The enrolled papers were evaluated with the Jadad Scale, Amstar 2 Scale and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. 25 (16 studies, 5 reviews, 2 comments, 1 editorial, 1 descriptive paper) out of 476 studies met the inclusion criteria. Due to the variability in the age of the samples, the different techniques, the treatments among the participants in the studies and the finding of non-evaluable articles, a meta-analysis was not conducted. The limitations of this review are the single database research, the studies analyzed contain a non-statistically representative sample size and the lack of a control group. There is no standardized test to measure performance. It was shown that the development of visual skills can benefit athletes in injury prevention, and can lead to improved sports performance and motor function at any age, acquiring adaptive motor behaviour even when the visual system is impaired, due to task repetition and familiarity of the gesture. We intended to identify a multidisciplinary approach and a manual treatment scheme to optimize the circuitry involved in sport vision in order to increase the results that are achieved, but further studies will be needed to this end.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".