Abstract
Background
Warm-up is a central preparatory phase of training and competition, aimed at optimizing physiological and neuromuscular readiness for subsequent performance and reducing the risk of injury. However, the athlete warm-up literature spans diverse sports, populations, and intervention models, with substantial variability in protocol content, outcome selection, and reporting. No prior scoping review with an Evidence Gap Map (EGM) has comprehensively mapped this evidence across sports, warm-up modalities, and outcome domains.Objectives
To map the landscape of warm-up evidence in athletes, identify the main intervention types and outcome domains investigated, and locate key evidence gaps related to methodology, population coverage, sport specificity, and real-world applicability.Methods
A scoping review with EGM was conducted in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guidance, with methodological considerations informed by the PRISMA 2020 statement. Searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science Core Collection for studies published up to 20th January 2026. Eligible studies examined warm-up practices in athletes across competitive sports and evaluated performance, injury-related, physiological, or neuromuscular outcomes. Data were synthesized descriptively and organized within an EGM according to sport, age subgroup, warm-up type, and reported outcomes.Results
The search yielded 27,644 records, of which 964 studies published between 1972 and 2026 were included. Most studies examined acute, proxy-based performance outcomes, especially jump, sprint, agility/change-of-direction, and strength/power measures. Physiological and neuromuscular responses were also frequently assessed, whereas injury-related outcomes, competition-referent outcomes, and implementation-focused variables were comparatively scarce. The EGM identified recurring gaps in injury endpoints, underrepresented sports, incomplete reporting of dose variables, and limited ecological validity for feasibility, adherence, and real-world deployment.Conclusions
In the current warm-up evidence, the majority of the research studied warm-up as a strategy for acute performance readiness. In addition, studies on injury reduction remain limited compared to acute performance enhancement, reflecting a surveillance and reporting gap. Evidence for competition-referent transfer and real-world implementation also remains limited.Protocol registration
OSF: https://osf.io/f3msz, DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/7H9ZV.