Evidence-based practice (EBP) is the collated integration of practitioner expertise, athlete values and research evidence aimed to optimise the decision-making process surrounding sport performance. Despite the academic interest afforded to sport science research, our knowledge of how this research is applied in elite sport settings is limited. This current opinion examines the existing evidence of the translation of sport science research into the field, with a tailored focus on the current perceptions of practitioners, researchers and coaches. Recent studies show that practitioners and researchers report they ascertain sport science knowledge differently, with coaches preferring personal interactions compared with coaching courses or scientific journals. The limited peer-reviewed research shows that coaches perceive their knowledge is greater in fields such as tactical/technical areas, rather than physical fitness or general conditioning. This likely explains coaches’ greater perceived value in research dedicated to technical and tactical expertise, as well as mental training and skill acquisition. Practitioners place a large emphasis on the need for research in physical fitness areas, which is likely due to their occupational focus. There are many perceived barriers of sport science research application, including funding, time, coach/player/staff ‘buy in’ and research questions that may not apply to the setting. We contend that researchers and practitioners may benefit in producing research, ascertaining knowledge and disseminating findings in alternative methods that better align with coaches’ needs. In addition, educational strategies that focus on real-world context and promote social interaction between coaches, practitioners, organisational personnel and researchers would likely benefit all stakeholders.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The authors would like to thank Job Fransen for his insight into the revised version of this manuscript.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
No funding was provided that contributed to the development of this manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
Hugh Fullagar, Alan McCall, Franco Impellizzeri, Terry Favero and Aaron Coutts declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Coutts A. Challenges in developing evidence-based practice in high-performance sport. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017;12(6):717–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malone J, et al. Perspectives of applied collaborative sport science research within professional team sports. Eur J Sport Sci. 2019;19(2):147–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop D. An applied research model for the sport sciences. Sports Med. 2008;38(3):253–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reade I, Rodgers W, Spriggs K. New ideas for high performance coaches: a case study of knowledge transfer in sport science. Int J Sports Sci Coaching. 2008;3(3):335–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brink M, et al. What do football coaches want from sport science? Kinesiology. 2018;50(Suppl 1):150–4.Google Scholar
Sands W, McNeal J, Stone M. Plaudits and pitfalls in studying elite athletes. Percept Mot Skills. 2015;100(1):22–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardinale M. Commentary on “towards a grand unified theory of sports performance”. Hum Mov Sci. 2017;56:160–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams S, Kendall L. Perceptions of elite coaches and sports scientists of the research needs for elite coaching practice. J Sports Sci. 2007;25(14):1577–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burgess D. The research doesn’t always apply: practical solutions to evidence-based training-load monitoring in elite team sports. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017;12(Suppl 2):S2136–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banerjee S, Morley C. Professional doctorates in management: toward a practice-based approach to doctoral education. Acad Manag Learn Educ. 2012;12(2):173–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ardern C, et al. Unravelling confusion in sports medicine and sports science practice: a systematic approach to using the best of research and practice-based evidence to make a quality decision. Br J Sports Med. 2019;53(1):50–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchheit M. Houston, we still have a problem. Int J Sport Physiol Perform. 2017;12(8):1111–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haynes B. Can it work? Does it work? Is it worth it? The testing of healthcare interventions is evolving. Br Med J. 1999;319(7211):652–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCall A, et al. Can off-field “brains” provide a competitive advantage in professional football? Br J Sports Med. 2016;50(12):710–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eisenmann J. Translational cap between laboratory and playing field: new era to colve old problems in sport science. Transl J Am Coll Sports Med. 2017;2(8):37–43.Google Scholar
Halson S, Nichols J. When failure is not an option: creating excellence in sport through insights from special forces. Int J Sport Physiol Perform. 2015;10(2):137–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos S, et al. Coaches’ perceptions of competence and acknowledgement of training needs related to professional competences. J Sports Sci Med. 2010;9(3):62–70.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Mesquita I, Isidro S, Rosado A. Portuguese coaches’ perceptions of and preferences for knowledge sources related to their professional background. J Sports Sci Med. 2010;9(3):480–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
Stoszkowski J, Collins D. Sources, topics and use of knowledge by coaches. J Sports Sci. 2016;34(9):794–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterman H, et al. Facilitating large-scale implementation of evidence based health care: insider accounts from a co-operative inquiry. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapple R, et al. Integrating science into management of ecosystems in the Greater Blue Mountains. Environ Manag. 2011;48(4):659–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar