Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Sep 1;55(9):902-910.
doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-0540.19.

"To Tech or Not to Tech?" A Critical Decision-Making Framework for Implementing Technology in Sport

Johann Windt  1   2 , Kerry MacDonald  3 , David Taylor  4 , Bruno D Zumbo  2 , Ben C Sporer  1   2 , David T Martin  5
Affiliations
Review

"To Tech or Not to Tech?" A Critical Decision-Making Framework for Implementing Technology in Sport

Johann Windt et al. J Athl Train. .

Abstract

The current technological age has created exponential growth in the availability of technology and data in every industry, including sport. It is tempting to get caught up in the excitement of purchasing and implementing technology, but technology has a potential dark side that warrants consideration. Before investing in technology, it is imperative to consider the potential roadblocks, including its limitations and the contextual challenges that compromise implementation in a specific environment. A thoughtful approach is therefore necessary when deciding whether to implement any given technology into practice. In this article, we review the vision and pitfalls behind technology's potential in sport science and medicine applications and then present a critical decision-making framework of 4 simple questions to help practitioners decide whether to purchase and implement a given technology.

Keywords: analytics; global positioning systems; measurement; wearable devices.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A critical decision-making framework for integrating technology in sport.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Some sources of validity-related evidence.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bourdon PC, Cardinale M, Murray A, et al. Monitoring athlete training loads: consensus statement. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2017;12(suppl 2):S2161–S2170. doi: 10.1123/IJSPP.2017-0208. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Borresen J, Lambert MI. The quantification of training load, the training response and the effect on performance. Sports Med. 2012;39(9):779–795. doi: 10.2165/11317780-000000000-00000. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Saw AE, Main LC, Gastin PB. Monitoring the athlete training response: subjective self-reported measures trump commonly used objective measures: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2016;50(5):281–291. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094758. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Neupert EC, Cotterill ST, Jobson SA. Training-monitoring engagement: an evidence-based approach in elite sport. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2018;14(1):99–104. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2018-0098. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nässi A, Ferrauti A, Meyer T, Pfeiffer M, Kellmann M. Psychological tools used for monitoring training responses of athletes. Perform Enhanc Health. 2017;5(4):125–133. doi: 10.1016/j.peh.2017.05.001. - DOI