Slimani · PloS one 2017 · systematic review and meta-analysis · n=?

Steroid hormones and psychological responses to soccer matches: Insights from a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Cited 43 times in the scientific literature.

Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study

Systematic review and meta-analysis of non-randomized observational exposure studies (by design analogy)

PubMed 29023546 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0186100 · record verified 2026-08-26

What was done

A systematic review and meta-analysis conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and PICO criteria to assess steroid hormone (testosterone and cortisol) and psychological perturbations in response to soccer match-play. Analyses evaluated the moderating effects of match outcome (win vs. loss), sex, contest type (competitive vs. non-competitive), and competitive level (novice vs. high-level).

What was found

Testosterone increased after wins and decreased after losses compared to pre-game or baseline (p < 0.05). Cortisol changes did not differ by match outcome in female soccer players. Observed sex differences in hormone changes were not statistically significant for testosterone (males: Δ% = 6.26, ES = 0.28 vs. females: Δ% = 49.16, ES = 1.00) or cortisol (females: Δ% = 162.7, ES = 0.98 vs. males: Δ% = 34.60, ES = 1.20). Cortisol increases were higher in male novice players than in high-level players (Q = 18.08, p < 0.001) and higher in competitive versus non-competitive matches. Competitive level significantly moderated testosterone response regardless of sex (p < 0.001). Cortisol changes correlated with cognitive anxiety in starter females, while testosterone changes correlated with mood state in females and social connectedness in males.

Why it matters

This review quantifies how acute endocrine responses in soccer players depend on match outcome, competitive level, and fixture stakes, clarifying links between physiological stress markers and psychological states.

Limits

The abstract does not report the total number of studies or participant sample sizes. The underlying studies are observational field exposures rather than randomized controlled trials. Female data sets are limited, and reported psycho-physiological links are observational associations without established causality.

Cited by