Virtual Reality Sensing Technologies in Student Soccer Training: A Systematic Review of Tracking Systems and...

Soccer requires rapid tactical decision-making, perceptual-cognitive processing, and coordinated physical execution, making it a relevant application domain for virtual reality (VR). VR systems integrate head-mounted displays, inertial measurement units, eye-tracking sensors, and electroencephalographic interfaces to support training, assessment, rehabilitation, and engagement. However, evidence remains fragmented across populations, study designs, sensing configurations, and research purposes, limiting conclusions about effectiveness and real-world application. Following PRISMA 2020, this systematic review synthesized 20 empirical studies published between January 2020 and 16 August 2026 involving school, academy, collegiate, and selected indirect adult soccer populations. Studies were classified by sensor modality, tracking configuration, evidence purpose, and outcome domain. Controlled intervention studies reported possible short-term improvements in selected sensorimotor, tactical, perceptual-cognitive, technical, and motivational outcomes. In contrast, cross-sectional and profiling studies showed that some VR tasks distinguished players by expertise, age, or competitive level; these findings support assessment or discriminative validity but do not demonstrate that VR training improves performance. Rehabilitation and injury-related evidence was limited and partly derived from adult or clinical populations, whereas engagement studies suggested potential benefits for motivation, attention, and participation. Six-degrees-of-freedom HMDs, 360° projection systems, eye tracking, and EEG generated different types of evidence, but no study directly compared hardware configurations within the same sample. The main contribution of this review is an integrated evidence-purpose and sensor-based synthesis that distinguishes training effectiveness from assessment validity across student-soccer applications. Overall, evidence remains promising but preliminary because of small and mixed populations, methodological heterogeneity, incomplete technical reporting, possible publication and language bias, short follow-up, and limited transfer to full-match performance. Standardized sensor reporting, controlled interventions, and longitudinal transfer assessments are required. Protocol registration: OSF.