Reviews in the field of sports pedagogy: A look behind the scenes

Abstract

In recent years, a growing number of reviews have been published in the field of sports pedagogy. The standards for conducting meta-analyses and systematic reviews, which were originally developed for health sciences and medicine, are frequently used as methodological guidelines. However, these guidelines do not always align with the subject-specific objectives of other disciplines. Consequently, a wide variety of review typologies and methodological approaches have emerged. This has led to uncertainty and confusion regarding the selection of appropriate reviews. The aim of this paper is to improve the understanding of the different types of review. For this purpose, the common characteristics of reviews have been identified. It then proposes a structuring framework that classifies different review typologies according to three distinct aims. This should guide researchers in selecting the most appropriate type of review and methodological approach and should lead to greater consistency and coherence in future research efforts. To evaluate the suitability of the framework, a narrative review of reviews was conducted. The objective was to analyse the extent to which different types of review could be classified within the framework and to identify any inconsistencies. The initial overview confirmed its suitability. Different types of review with varying frequencies were identified. However, the aims and methodological approaches were not always clearly stated. In future, these should be presented more transparently. Furthermore, inconsistencies in the selection and application of specific review typologies were identified. Overall, the findings provide important insights intended to stimulate the future development of specific guidelines.