Decision MakingNCT07253597
Critical Thinking Volleyball Tactics
A study testing Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball training and Usual volleyball training in people with Decision Making and Athletic Performance, run by Federal University of Vicosa at 1 site in Colombia.
Trial summary
This quasi-experimental study will examine whether a Tactical Critical Thinking Program (TPCT) can improve technical-tactical decision-making in university volleyball players compared with usual training. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, men onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Decision Making, Athletic Performance, Volleyball
- What is being tested?
- Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball training and Usual volleyball training
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 24 participants
- Where
- 1 siteColombia
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2025to 30 Oct 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Men only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age 18 years or older
- University volleyball player enrolled in the participating programme in Medellín, Colombia
- Regular participation in team training (at least two organised sessions per week before study enrolment)
- Medically cleared and physically able to take part in full volleyball training and match play
- Availability to attend the majority of scheduled intervention and assessment sessions over the ≈ 4-week study period
- Provision of written informed consent
Who cannot join
- Current musculoskeletal injury or medical condition that limits safe participation in volleyball training or matches
- Any medical contraindication to high-intensity intermittent exercise as reported by the participant or team medical staff
- Planned absence that would prevent attendance at baseline or post-intervention assessments or more than 20% of training sessions
- Concurrent participation in another structured intervention specifically targeting tactical decision-making or psychological skills in volleyball
- Withdrawal of consent at any point before completion of post-intervention assessments
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Effect of a Tactical Critical Thinking Intervention on Technical-tactical Decision-making in University Volleyball: A Quasi-experimental Study
This quasi-experimental study will examine whether a Tactical Critical Thinking Program (TPCT) can improve technical-tactical decision-making in university volleyball players compared with usual training. In many university teams, practice is dominated by repetitive technical drills and coach-centred instruction, with limited opportunities for players to analyse the game, discuss options with teammates, or reflect critically on their decisions.
The study compares two groups of adult male volleyball players from a university-level programme in Colombia. The intervention group completed a 4-week Tactical Critical Thinking Program integrated into regular volleyball practice, while the comparison group continued with their usual training routines, without structured reflection or guided questioning. The TPCT uses representative game-based tasks, short planned pauses for group discussion, and questions that prompt players to identify tactical problems, generate alternative solutions, justify their choices, and adjust strategies collectively.
Read more
All participants assessed before and after the 4-week period. Assessments included validated technical skill tests for serve, reception and spike, and standardised small-sided games (4 vs 4) recorded on video. Trained observers coded each action to calculate decision-making indices for the three key skills, expressing the proportion of tactically appropriate decisions during play.
The primary aim was to determine whether adding structured tactical reflection and critical thinking activities to volleyball practice produces greater improvements in decision-making than usual training alone. A secondary aim was to explore whether the TPCT also enhances technical execution. Findings are expected to inform coaches and physical education professionals about how to design cognitively enriched, game-representative training for university team sports.
Read the detailed description
This interventional study evaluates the effect of a Tactical Critical Thinking Program (PTPC, by its Spanish acronym) on technical-tactical decision-making in university volleyball. The study uses a quasi-experimental, non-randomized, parallel-group design with intentional allocation. One group receives regular volleyball training enriched with the PTPC, and a comparison group continues with usual practice routines without structured reflective spaces.
The setting is a university men's volleyball programme in Cartagena, Colombia. Eligible participants are adult male players who belong to the university team, have regular training experience, are medically cleared for full participation and can attend the planned training and assessment sessions. Exclusion criteria include any current injury or medical restriction for sport participation and an inability to comply with the intervention schedule.
The PTPC integrates critical thinking and collaborative reflection into representative volleyball practice. Across approximately 12 sessions, embedded within normal team training, each session follows a stable pedagogical sequence. An initial brief activation phase clarifies the tactical focus of the day (for example, organisation of reception, serve-receive-attack connections or spike decision-making) and invites players to identify recurrent problems and shared objectives. The central phase consists of game-based drills and small-sided games that manipulate numerical relations, court spaces and rules to expose players to tactically demanding situations involving serve, reception, spike and defensive actions. Within this central phase, the coach introduces short, preplanned pauses in which players analyse recent sequences and discuss what is working, what is limiting performance, which technical resources they use or lack, and which tactical or positional adjustments they propose. A final phase of more open play under full rules emphasises the application and refinement of the agreed tactical adjustments and promotes metacognitive reflection on why certain options are chosen and how they relate to collective strategy.
The comparison group follows the usual training programme designed by the coaching staff. This programme includes warm-up, physical preparation, technical drills and team game play, but it does not include the protocolised reflective pauses or the guided questioning structure that characterises the PTPC. Training volume, frequency and general intensity remain as comparable as possible between groups so that the main planned difference is the presence or absence of the structured critical-thinking component.
Outcomes focus on technical-tactical performance in serve, reception and spike. Technical execution is assessed through a standardised battery of volleyball skill tests that quantify accuracy and consistency for each action using target zones and scoring criteria based on established methodological references. Tactical decision-making is assessed during standardised small-sided games (for example, 4 vs 4) on a regulation court under official rules. Games are video recorded, and trained observers code each serve, reception and spike as tactically appropriate or inappropriate according to predefined criteria (such as serving to vulnerable zones, directing reception to an optimal setting area, or attacking into uncovered spaces). For each player and each skill, a decision-making index represents the proportion of appropriate actions out of the total number of observed actions.
Assessments take place in the week immediately before the intervention period and in the week after its completion. Data collection also includes basic sociodemographic and anthropometric information (for example, age, training experience, body mass, height and body mass index) in order to characterise the sample and, if necessary, use these variables as covariates. Observers receive training in systematic notation of volleyball actions, and inter-observer agreement is checked prior to formal coding to ensure acceptable reliability.
Data management relies on anonymised participant codes and secure storage of datasets and video material. Statistical analysis describes the sample with means, standard deviations, medians and interquartile ranges as appropriate. Pre-post changes in decision-making indices and technical scores are analysed within each group, and differences in change between the PTPC and comparison groups are examined with standard parametric or non-parametric tests according to distribution, complemented by effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals. The level of significance is set at 0.05, and interpretation acknowledges the quasi-experimental, non-randomized nature of the design.
The study aims to provide evidence on whether embedding a structured critical-thinking programme into routine volleyball practice optimises decision-making and technical performance, and whether this model offers a transferable framework for other team sports and educational contexts.
- Conditions
- Decision Making, Athletic Performance, Volleyball
- Being tested
- Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball training, Usual volleyball training
- Keywords
- Tactical Critical Thinking Program, Volleyball, Team sports, Decision making, Technical-tactical skills
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball trainingOther
Behavioral intervention integrated into regular university men's volleyball practice. The program adds structured reflective pauses and guided questioning to usual training content (serve, reception, spike and team play). Sessions use game-based drills and small-sided games under modified constraints to elicit tactically demanding situations. After short sequences of play, the coach leads brief discussions in which players identify tactical problems, generate and justify alternatives and agree collective adjustments. A final phase of open play emphasises applying these decisions while promoting metacognitive reflection. Training frequency, duration and physical workload remain comparable to the control arm; the distinctive element is the protocolised critical-thinking and collaborative-reflection component.
Usual volleyball trainingOther
Behavioral condition consisting of the team's standard university men's volleyball training program with no added reflective component. Sessions include warm-up, general physical preparation, technical drills for serve, reception, spike and defence, positional work and team play under normal coaching practice. Coaches do not apply the structured reflective pauses or guided questioning protocol used in the experimental arm. Training schedule, session duration and general intensity are maintained as similar as possible to the intervention arm so that the principal difference between arms is the absence of the Tactical Critical Thinking Program.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| TPCT | Experimental | Participants in this arm attend their usual university volleyball practices enriched with the Tactical Critical Thinking Program. Training follows the regular team schedule (approximately three 90-minute sessions per week for 4 weeks) and is fully integrated into routine practice. The intervention adds game-based drills and small-sided games focused on serve, reception and spike, combined with brief, structured pauses. During these pauses, the coach guides players to analyse recent sequences, identify tactical problems, propose and justify alternatives and agree collective adjustments. A final phase of more open play emphasises applying these decisions, with prompts that foster metacognition. Training volume and physical workload are comparable to the comparison arm; the distinctive element is the structured critical-thinking and reflective-dialogue component. Receives: Other: Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball training |
| C-TPCT | Active comparator | Participants in this arm attend their usual university volleyball practices without any added reflective component. Training follows the regular team schedule (approximately three 90-minute sessions per week for 4 weeks) and includes standard warm-up, physical preparation, technical drills and team play focused on serve, reception, spike and defensive actions, as determined by the coaching staff. Coaches do not implement the protocolised reflective pauses or guided questioning used in the experimental arm. Training volume, frequency and overall intensity remain comparable to those of the intervention arm, so that the main planned difference between groups is the absence of the structured critical-thinking and collaborative-reflection activities in this control condition. Receives: Other: Usual volleyball training |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in decision-making index during standardized game situations
Decision-making index during standardized small-sided volleyball games (for serve, reception and spike). The index represents the proportion of tactically appropriate actions out of the total number of coded actions in 4 vs 4 games on a regulation court. Actions are coded from video by trained observers using predefined criteria (for example, serve to vulnerable zones, reception directed to an optimal setting area, spike to uncovered spaces). Higher scores indicate a greater proportion of tactically appropriate decisions. Analyses compare change from baseline to post-intervention between the Tactical Critical Thinking Program arm and the usual-training control arm.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Secondary outcomes (3)
Change in decision-making index for serve
Decision-making index for serve during standardized 4 vs 4 games. Each serve is coded as tactically appropriate or inappropriate according to predefined criteria (for example, direction and depth toward vulnerable reception zones). The index is the proportion of appropriate serves out of all serves performed by each player. Higher values indicate better serve-related tactical decision-making. Change from baseline to post-intervention is compared between arms.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Change in decision-making index for reception
Decision-making index for reception during standardized 4 vs 4 games. Each reception is coded as tactically appropriate or inappropriate according to predefined criteria (for example, directing the ball to an optimal setting zone or player). The index is the proportion of appropriate receptions out of all receptions performed by each player. Higher values indicate better reception-related tactical decision-making. Change from baseline to post-intervention is compared between arms.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Change in decision-making index for spike
Decision-making index for spike during standardized 4 vs 4 games. Each spike is coded as tactically appropriate or inappropriate based on predefined criteria (for example, attacking into uncovered spaces or exploiting blocking mismatches). The index is the proportion of appropriate spikes out of all spikes performed by each player. Higher values indicate better spike-related tactical decision-making. Change from baseline to post-intervention is compared between arms.
Measured: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Nov 2025
- Study start1 Sep 2025
- Primary completion15 Oct 2025
- Study completion30 Oct 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Decision MakingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Quasi-experimental, non-randomized, parallel assignment with two arms. Participants belong to one university men's volleyball programme and remain in a single arm for the entire study. One arm receives usual volleyball training enriched with the Tactical Critical Thinking Program (structured reflective pauses and guided questioning within game-based practice). The comparison arm continues with usual training only, without the structured reflective component. Both arms follow similar schedules, volumes and intensities of training. Outcomes are assessed at baseline and at the end of the intervention period to compare pre-post changes between arms.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of Vicosa
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Édison Andrés Pérez Bedoya, Federal University of Vicosa
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07253597
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Volley_USB_TdeA
- Status last verified
- Nov 2025
- First submitted
- 18 Nov 2025
- Last updated
- 28 Nov 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the published results (decision-making indices, technical skill test scores and basic demographic variables such as age and playing experience) are available to other researchers for academic, non-commercial use. No video files or direct identifiers are shared. Data access depends on a reasonable research proposal and the signing of a data use agreement that prohibits re-identification or data linkage with other identifiable sources.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Nov 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of a Tactical Critical Thinking Intervention on Technical-tactical Decision-making in University Volleyball: A Quasi-experimental Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07253597
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Volley_USB_TdeA
- Conditions
- Decision Making, Athletic Performance, Volleyball
- Keywords
- Tactical Critical Thinking Program, Volleyball, Team sports, Decision making, Technical-tactical skills
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Federal University of VicosaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Oct 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Oct 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 28 Nov 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This quasi-experimental study will examine whether a Tactical Critical Thinking Program (TPCT) can improve technical-tactical decision-making in university volleyball players compared with usual training. In many university teams, practice is dominated by repetitive technical drills and coach-centred instruction, with limited opportunities for players to analyse the game, discuss options with teammates, or reflect critically on their decisions.
The study compares two groups of adult male volleyball players from a university-level programme in Colombia. The intervention group completed a 4-week Tactical Critical Thinking Program integrated into regular volleyball practice, while the comparison group continued with their usual training routines, without structured reflection or guided questioning. The TPCT uses representative game-based tasks, short planned pauses for group discussion, and questions that prompt players to identify tactical problems, generate alternative solutions, justify their choices, and adjust strategies collectively.
All participants assessed before and after the 4-week period. Assessments included validated technical skill tests for serve, reception and spike, and standardised small-sided games (4 vs 4) recorded on video. Trained observers coded each action to calculate decision-making indices for the three key skills, expressing the proportion of tactically appropriate decisions during play.
The primary aim was to determine whether adding structured tactical reflection and critical thinking activities to volleyball practice produces greater improvements in decision-making than usual training alone. A secondary aim was to explore whether the TPCT also enhances technical execution. Findings are expected to inform coaches and physical education professionals about how to design cognitively enriched, game-representative training for university team sports.
Detailed description
This interventional study evaluates the effect of a Tactical Critical Thinking Program (PTPC, by its Spanish acronym) on technical-tactical decision-making in university volleyball. The study uses a quasi-experimental, non-randomized, parallel-group design with intentional allocation. One group receives regular volleyball training enriched with the PTPC, and a comparison group continues with usual practice routines without structured reflective spaces.
The setting is a university men's volleyball programme in Cartagena, Colombia. Eligible participants are adult male players who belong to the university team, have regular training experience, are medically cleared for full participation and can attend the planned training and assessment sessions. Exclusion criteria include any current injury or medical restriction for sport participation and an inability to comply with the intervention schedule.
The PTPC integrates critical thinking and collaborative reflection into representative volleyball practice. Across approximately 12 sessions, embedded within normal team training, each session follows a stable pedagogical sequence. An initial brief activation phase clarifies the tactical focus of the day (for example, organisation of reception, serve-receive-attack connections or spike decision-making) and invites players to identify recurrent problems and shared objectives. The central phase consists of game-based drills and small-sided games that manipulate numerical relations, court spaces and rules to expose players to tactically demanding situations involving serve, reception, spike and defensive actions. Within this central phase, the coach introduces short, preplanned pauses in which players analyse recent sequences and discuss what is working, what is limiting performance, which technical resources they use or lack, and which tactical or positional adjustments they propose. A final phase of more open play under full rules emphasises the application and refinement of the agreed tactical adjustments and promotes metacognitive reflection on why certain options are chosen and how they relate to collective strategy.
The comparison group follows the usual training programme designed by the coaching staff. This programme includes warm-up, physical preparation, technical drills and team game play, but it does not include the protocolised reflective pauses or the guided questioning structure that characterises the PTPC. Training volume, frequency and general intensity remain as comparable as possible between groups so that the main planned difference is the presence or absence of the structured critical-thinking component.
Outcomes focus on technical-tactical performance in serve, reception and spike. Technical execution is assessed through a standardised battery of volleyball skill tests that quantify accuracy and consistency for each action using target zones and scoring criteria based on established methodological references. Tactical decision-making is assessed during standardised small-sided games (for example, 4 vs 4) on a regulation court under official rules. Games are video recorded, and trained observers code each serve, reception and spike as tactically appropriate or inappropriate according to predefined criteria (such as serving to vulnerable zones, directing reception to an optimal setting area, or attacking into uncovered spaces). For each player and each skill, a decision-making index represents the proportion of appropriate actions out of the total number of observed actions.
Assessments take place in the week immediately before the intervention period and in the week after its completion. Data collection also includes basic sociodemographic and anthropometric information (for example, age, training experience, body mass, height and body mass index) in order to characterise the sample and, if necessary, use these variables as covariates. Observers receive training in systematic notation of volleyball actions, and inter-observer agreement is checked prior to formal coding to ensure acceptable reliability.
Data management relies on anonymised participant codes and secure storage of datasets and video material. Statistical analysis describes the sample with means, standard deviations, medians and interquartile ranges as appropriate. Pre-post changes in decision-making indices and technical scores are analysed within each group, and differences in change between the PTPC and comparison groups are examined with standard parametric or non-parametric tests according to distribution, complemented by effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals. The level of significance is set at 0.05, and interpretation acknowledges the quasi-experimental, non-randomized nature of the design.
The study aims to provide evidence on whether embedding a structured critical-thinking programme into routine volleyball practice optimises decision-making and technical performance, and whether this model offers a transferable framework for other team sports and educational contexts.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Quasi-experimental, non-randomized, parallel assignment with two arms. Participants belong to one university men's volleyball programme and remain in a single arm for the entire study. One arm receives usual volleyball training enriched with the Tactical Critical Thinking Program (structured reflective pauses and guided questioning within game-based practice). The comparison arm continues with usual training only, without the structured reflective component. Both arms follow similar schedules, volumes and intensities of training. Outcomes are assessed at baseline and at the end of the intervention period to compare pre-post changes between arms.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| TPCT | Experimental | Other: Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball trainingParticipants in this arm attend their usual university volleyball practices enriched with the Tactical Critical Thinking Program. Training follows the regular team schedule (approximately three 90-minute sessions per week for 4 weeks) and is fully integrated into routine practice. The intervention adds game-based drills and small-sided games focused on serve, reception and spike, combined with brief, structured pauses. During these pauses, the coach guides players to analyse recent sequences, identify tactical problems, propose and justify alternatives and agree collective adjustments. A final phase of more open play emphasises applying these decisions, with prompts that foster metacognition. Training volume and physical workload are comparable to the comparison arm; the distinctive element is the structured critical-thinking and reflective-dialogue component. |
| C-TPCT | Active comparator | Other: Usual volleyball trainingParticipants in this arm attend their usual university volleyball practices without any added reflective component. Training follows the regular team schedule (approximately three 90-minute sessions per week for 4 weeks) and includes standard warm-up, physical preparation, technical drills and team play focused on serve, reception, spike and defensive actions, as determined by the coaching staff. Coaches do not implement the protocolised reflective pauses or guided questioning used in the experimental arm. Training volume, frequency and overall intensity remain comparable to those of the intervention arm, so that the main planned difference between groups is the absence of the structured critical-thinking and collaborative-reflection activities in this control condition. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Age 18 years or older
- University volleyball player enrolled in the participating programme in Medellín, Colombia
- Regular participation in team training (at least two organised sessions per week before study enrolment)
- Medically cleared and physically able to take part in full volleyball training and match play
- Availability to attend the majority of scheduled intervention and assessment sessions over the ≈ 4-week study period
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Current musculoskeletal injury or medical condition that limits safe participation in volleyball training or matches
- Any medical contraindication to high-intensity intermittent exercise as reported by the participant or team medical staff
- Planned absence that would prevent attendance at baseline or post-intervention assessments or more than 20% of training sessions
- Concurrent participation in another structured intervention specifically targeting tactical decision-making or psychological skills in volleyball
- Withdrawal of consent at any point before completion of post-intervention assessments
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball trainingBehavioral intervention integrated into regular university men's volleyball practice. The program adds structured reflective pauses and guided questioning to usual training content (serve, reception, spike and team play). Sessions use game-based drills and small-sided games under modified constraints to elicit tactically demanding situations. After short sequences of play, the coach leads brief discussions in which players identify tactical problems, generate and justify alternatives and agree collective adjustments. A final phase of open play emphasises applying these decisions while promoting metacognitive reflection. Training frequency, duration and physical workload remain comparable to the control arm; the distinctive element is the protocolised critical-thinking and collaborative-reflection component. | Other | TPCT |
| Usual volleyball trainingBehavioral condition consisting of the team's standard university men's volleyball training program with no added reflective component. Sessions include warm-up, general physical preparation, technical drills for serve, reception, spike and defence, positional work and team play under normal coaching practice. Coaches do not apply the structured reflective pauses or guided questioning protocol used in the experimental arm. Training schedule, session duration and general intensity are maintained as similar as possible to the intervention arm so that the principal difference between arms is the absence of the Tactical Critical Thinking Program. | Other | C-TPCT |
Primary outcome
Change in decision-making index during standardized game situations
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Decision-making index during standardized small-sided volleyball games (for serve, reception and spike). The index represents the proportion of tactically appropriate actions out of the total number of coded actions in 4 vs 4 games on a regulation court. Actions are coded from video by trained observers using predefined criteria (for example, serve to vulnerable zones, reception directed to an optimal setting area, spike to uncovered spaces). Higher scores indicate a greater proportion of tactically appropriate decisions. Analyses compare change from baseline to post-intervention between the Tactical Critical Thinking Program arm and the usual-training control arm.
3 secondary outcomes
Change in decision-making index for serve
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Change in decision-making index for reception
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Change in decision-making index for spike
Time frame: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 28 Nov 2025.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant data (IPD) underlying the published results (decision-making indices, technical skill test scores and basic demographic variables such as age and playing experience) are available to other researchers for academic, non-commercial use. No video files or direct identifiers are shared. Data access depends on a reasonable research proposal and the signing of a data use agreement that prohibits re-identification or data linkage with other identifiable sources.
Related trials for Decision Making
Active, not recruitingObservational study
The Impact of De-implementing Urine Dipsticks for Diagnosis of UTIs in Hospitals
Urinary Tract Infections, Diagnostic Techniques and Procedures
Not yet recruiting
A Multidimensional Intervention to Improve Ethical Decision-Making Competence Among Nursing Student Interns: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Ethical Decision-Making Competence in Nursing Student Interns
Active, not recruiting
Engaging Adolescents in Decisions About Return of Genomic Research Results
Genetic Screening, Adolescent
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Risk Sharing vs Risk Dumping: Parental Attitudes About Risks
Pediatric Surgery, Informed Consent
Not yet recruiting
FIQS Dissemination and Implementation
Inpatient Experience Survey Administration, Inpatient Experience Survey Response
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Tactical Critical Thinking Program plus usual volleyball training and Usual volleyball training in people with Decision Making and Athletic Performance, run by Federal University of Vicosa at 1 site in Colombia.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 28 Nov 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Colombia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in decision-making index during standardized game situations (time frame: Baseline (week 0) and immediately post-intervention (within 1 week after the last training session; total intervention period ≈ 4 weeks)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 28 Nov 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 28 Oct 2026.