Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11049143›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of sports medicine2000

Validation of an instrument for injury data collection in rugby union.

A McManus

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of sports medicine, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Tennis injuries: occurrence, aetiology, and prevention.British journal of sports medicine · 2006
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

A McManusCentre for Health Promotion Research, School of Public Health, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia. mcmanusa@health.curtin.edu.au

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo provide the basis for collecting rugby union injury data using a rigorously validated injury report form.

methodsSeven stages were used to assess face, content, and criterion validity of the rugby union injury report form. A 22 member panel plus four sporting bodies assessed the form for face validity, and an expert panel assessed it for content and criterion validity. Panel members were consulted until consensus was reached. A yardstick developed by an expert panel using the Delphi technique was used to assess the reliability of the form. An independent panel of 10 viewed a series of five videotaped injuries, three times over a five week period to assess inter-rater and intrarater reliability. The form was then trialed by 40 people in situ during four games.

resultsThe rugby union injury report form for games and training was developed, and the face, content, and criterion validity successfully assessed. A seven step protocol to create a yardstick was also developed to assist in the validation process. Both inter-rater and intrarater reliability results indicated a 98% agreement. The 40 trialists who completed forms in situ during four games were found to have an inter-rater reliability agreement of 98% for nine injuries.

conclusionsA measurement instrument for injury data collection in rugby union was successfully developed and validated, providing researchers with a basis for future studies in this area. A procedure to develop future injury data collection instruments in other sports was also developed.

Indexed as

Data CollectionDelphi TechniqueFootballHumansReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID11049143
PMCPMC1756250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.