Author(s): REEVES, N., COMYNS, T., Institution: GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY, Country: AUSTRALIA, Abstract-ID: 257

INTRODUCTION:
Growing domestic and international demand for sport science practitioners is being driven by the ever-increasing focus within the sporting world on optimizing performance. Whilst several countries have rigorous professional standards that underpin the practice of sport science, outline base level knowledge, skills and competencies, and guide certification and accreditation frameworks, this is not the case in all countries where sport science is practiced. Additionally, for a profession that sees its constituents commonly move from country to country, international standards for sport science practice do not exist. In 2025 the International Confederation of Sport and Exercise Science Practice (ICSESP) completed a systematic audit of the existing sport science professional standards used to underpin national certification systems around the world. It was proposed that the audit could set the foundation for developing an international set of sport science professional practice standards that would promote harmonization of the profession across jurisdictions. The purpose of this study was to develop consensus on international professional standards for sport science.
METHODS:
The study used the 2025 ICSESP sport science standards audit findings and employed a Delphi approach to build a consensus on the international practice standards. An expert working group made up of 22 members from 16 countries reviewed the standards in each round. They considered whether the standards identified in the audit should be included or excluded, and if to be included, whether they should be core or non-core. Additionally, the expert working group were asked to nominate standards that were not identified in the audit and to check the wording of the standards for accuracy. To be included in the final standards and as core, each standard required 80% consensus from the expert working group. Standards that reached the consensus threshold, but not for core, were included as non-core standards. External feedback was sort as the standards approached the final draft. Each phase of the process was guided by a steering committee.
RESULTS:
The Delphi process found consensus on five overarching professional standard domains for sport science practice: Professional and Ethical Practice, Foundational Knowledge, Performance Assessment, Program Design and Delivery, and Data Anaysis, Research and Technology; and 24 individual standard elements. All bar two of the standard elements were accepted as core, which have been included in the standards since they were close to meeting the 80% threshold and are reflected in countries where sport science professional standards exist.
CONCLUSION:
The international sport science professional practice standards consensus has been achieved and the ICSESP has published the standards. The standards will help to synchronize approaches to education, support and guide accreditation procedures, and steer the practice of sport science globally.