Evaluation tools used for talent identification in youth soccer: a systematic review
Creators: name: Silvino, Valmir
name: Ferreira, Cirley
name: Santos, Marcos
Publisher: name: Open Science Framework
Year: 2022
Subjects: subject: Physical Sciences and Mathematics
subject: Medicine and Health Sciences
subject: young athletes; football; physical; sprint; lower limbs strength.

description: Research Aims The primary aim of the current research is to conduct a systematic review to establish existing knowledge on methods used in the talent identification process in youth soccer. Research Question The research project will answer the following question: "What tools and tests are mostly used for talent identification in association football?" Research Hypothesis The research team hypothesize that physical performance is the main subject of research considering talent identification process in soccer. They will not provide coaches with information relevant to the needs of their selection decisions. Expected Outcomes The expected outcomes of this research are 1) A broader understanding of the tests and tools used for talent identification in association football. 2) A new direction for future research and researchers to focus their attention. 3) Greater awareness of the key problems regarding talent identification and development systems. Methodology &amp; Study This project will use a systematic review to address the research question. The systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Moher et al., 2009). A Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome (PICO) search strategy will be employed to determine the inclusion and exclusion of articles. The search categories are as follows: The population of interest (P) is youth players in association football. The intervention (I) is assessments for talent identification. No comparison (C) will be used because this research is reviewing skill-assessments individually. The outcome measures (O) of these assessments relate to selection status and player development. A scoping search will be completed to define the scope of the project and identify gaps within the literature. The initial literature search for this review will be achieved using the PubMed, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect databases. These databases were selected because most are sport-specific, and many components of 'skill acquisition' lie within psychology, motor control, motor learning, and education pedagogies. All databases will be searched using the same search string. The PICO criteria will be used to delineate the inclusion and exclusion of articles. The inclusion criteria are as follows: 1) abstracts of each article are required to be present in the database search, with all languages considered provided it could be read in English; 2) articles defining both unidimensional and multidimensional skill assessment or talent identification measures in association football are considered; 3) feature male or female participants, that are classified as youth or children (6-18y). Review articles, meta-analysis, pilot studies, clinical trials, association studies, and studies performed with animal models were excluded. Each database will be searched, and duplicate records will be removed. Information regarding the searches will be recorded in a customised Excel spreadsheet, and publications stored using the Rayyan website. Two reviewers (VOS and CPF) will screen the titles, then the abstracts to ensure eligibility against set criteria, and that no relevant publications are missed. Further articles will be assessed and possibly included following examinations of citations within collected studies (snowballing). Following the independent screening, conflicts regarding article inclusion will be resolved with a third reviewer (MAPS), who will make the final decision. We used a study quality scale in order to quantify the quality of the studies included in this systematic review (Castellano et al., 2014). This scale has been previously used in other systematic reviews focusing on football. The scale included nine questions (see Tables 1 and 2) adapted from Castellano et al. (Castellano et al., 2014). Additionally, the authors used the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized studies (RoBANS), in order to investigate potential biases present in the studies included in the present systematic review (Kim et al., 2013).