"Core Training" Isn't That Important
Research shows unless you're a beginner, it won't improve performance all that much.
For decades, core training has been heralded as the foundation of athletic performance, from explosive power to injury prevention. Yet despite its widespread adoption across all levels of sport, the actual evidence supporting these claims has remained surprisingly fragmented. This meta-analysis of 29 randomised controlled trials involving 956 athletes aged 15–23 years reveals a sobering reality: while core training excels at improving foundational qualities like endurance and balance, its direct impact on sport-specific performance measures falls far short of expectations.
PMID: 40319291
Key Points
The Reality Check: Core training demonstrated large, statistically significant improvements in general athletic performance, particularly for core endurance and balance. However, it showed only moderate, non-significant effects on overall sport-specific performance.
Sport-Specific Performance Falls Short: Despite widespread claims, core training failed to produce significant improvements across critical performance measures, including speed, maximal strength, flexibility, change of direction, technical skills, throwing velocity, and vertical jump height.
High Variability Across Studies: The analysis revealed extremely high heterogeneity across outcomes, indicating that training responses varied substantially based on competitive level, intervention duration, sport type, and individual athlete characteristics.
Aim
This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of core training on both sport-specific performance measures (power, speed, flexibility) and general athletic performance indicators (core endurance, balance) across different athletic populations, while examining potential moderating factors influencing training effectiveness.
Methods
Study Selection: Following PRISMA guidelines, researchers conducted a systematic review across five databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Google Scholar), identifying 1,670 initial records. After rigorous screening, 29 randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria.
Participants: The analysis included 956 athletes aged 15-23 years across four competitive levels: professional (6 studies), semi-professional (6 studies), amateur (7 studies), and youth competitive (10 studies). Participants represented diverse sports, including team sports (soccer, basketball, handball, volleyball), individual sports (swimming, gymnastics, tennis), combat sports (taekwondo, wrestling, karate), and racquet sports (badminton, tennis).
Intervention Protocols: Core training interventions ranged from 4 to 24 weeks in duration, with most using 7-to 12-week protocols. Training frequency typically involved 2–3 sessions weekly, with session durations varying from 20–120 minutes. Four distinct intervention types emerged: core stability training, core strength training, combined interventions (core + sport-specific training), and progressive loading protocols.
Statistical Analysis: Researchers employed random-effects meta-analysis using the Restricted Maximum-Likelihood (REML) method and HKSJ method for calculating confidence intervals. Standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for all outcomes. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale (average score: 5.65/10, indicating fair quality) and Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
Results
General Athletic Performance—The Winners:
Core Endurance: Showed large, significant improvements across 8 studies with 247 participants, though with high heterogeneity.
Balance: Demonstrated significant positive effects across 7 studies with 222 participants and moderate heterogeneity.
Sport-Specific Performance—The Disappointing Reality:
Speed: No significant improvement with moderate heterogeneity.
Maximal Strength: Large but non-significant effect with extremely high heterogeneity.
Flexibility: No significant effect with high heterogeneity.
Change of Direction: Minimal, non-significant effect with moderate heterogeneity.
Technical Skills: Non-significant overall effect, with extremely high heterogeneity.
Throwing Velocity/Distance: Positive but non-significant effect with high heterogeneity.
Vertical Jump: Near-significant effect with high heterogeneity.
Competitive Level Matters: Subgroup analysis revealed distinct patterns across competitive levels for balance performance. Amateur athletes showed the largest effect, followed by professional athletes, semi-professional athletes, and youth competitive athletes.
Sensitivity Analysis: When researchers systematically removed individual studies to test robustness, general athletic performance measures (core endurance and balance) remained stable and statistically significant. However, sport-specific measures showed dramatic instability, particularly speed, maximal strength, and technical skills, indicating these findings are highly unreliable.
