PloS one · 2026 · 範疇回顧（依標題推測）
Experimental and quantitative observational research in fencing and wheelchair fencing: A scoping review.
傷害流行病學・預防・篩檢 · 運動傷害流行病學
中文閱讀摘要
擊劍研究量增但方法與主題不均，缺乏前瞻及介入設計，傷病與輪椅項目研究有限，需強化報告與代表性。
AI 依來源摘要整理，未經人工逐篇核對。閱讀結論前，請回溯研究族群、方法與限制。
原始摘要
Background
Fencing and wheelchair fencing are Olympic and Paralympic sports with growing global participation and increasing scientific interest. However, the overall structure, methodological profile, and thematic distribution of experimental and quantitative observational research in both has not been systematically characterized.
Objective
To map the scope, methodological characteristics, and thematic focus of experimental and quantitative observational studies involving fencing and wheelchair fencing athletes.
Methods
A scoping review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and EBSCOhost were searched for studies containing the terms "fencing," "fencer," or "fencers" in the title or abstract. Eligible studies employed experimental or quantitative observational designs and included fencing athletes as participants. Data were extracted using a structured framework and summarized descriptively across study design, research domain, participant characteristics, sample size, weapon discipline, and geographic distribution.
Results
A total of 445 studies met inclusion criteria. Publication volume increased substantially after 2015. Laboratory-based (35.7%) and cross-sectional (30.3%) designs predominated, whereas prospective cohort studies (5.4%) and randomized controlled trials (4.3%) were comparatively uncommon. Performance and skill analysis constituted the largest research domain (41.1%), while injury/epidemiology (7.9%), recovery/rehabilitation (4.3%), and training load/fatigue (1.6%) research were limited. Most studies involved small sample sizes with fewer than 50 participants and focused on able-bodied athletes; wheelchair fencing was markedly underrepresented. Sex was not specified in 24.3% of studies, and weapon discipline was not reported in 44.9%. Research output was geographically concentrated in Europe and select North American and East Asian countries.
Conclusions
Although fencing research has expanded rapidly in recent years, it remains methodologically and thematically uneven. Greater emphasis on longitudinal and interventional designs, injury surveillance, rehabilitation research, improved reporting practices, and inclusive representation across sex, weapon discipline, geographic regions, and wheelchair athletes are necessary to strengthen the translational relevance and evidence-based development of fencing sport science.
至 Europe PMC 閱讀完整來源 ↗ · 擷取日期 2026-10-19
書目、來源與全文狀態
- DOI
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0350383
- PMID／PMCID
- 42224339 / PMC13225351
- 作者
- Holmes K, Bottoms L
- 首次發表日期
- 2026-06-01Europe PMC 提供，部分日期可能依年份或月份推定。
- 卷／期／頁碼或文章編號
- 21 ／ 6 ／ e0350383
- 書目來源與查核日期
- Europe PMC · 2026-10-19僅核對書目欄位與來源連結；不代表已評讀研究品質。
- 全文與授權
- 來源列有免費全文（查核 2026-10-19），未逐篇測試 PDF 下載。 來源授權標示：cc by。
可回溯引用
Holmes K, Bottoms L. Experimental and quantitative observational research in fencing and wheelchair fencing: A scoping review. PloS one. 2026;21(6):e0350383. PMID: 42224339. PMCID: PMC13225351. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0350383
本站供教育與研究參考。單篇摘要、文體標籤與期刊影響係數不等於證據品質或個別病人的診療建議。