Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25383248›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2014

Recurrent hamstring injury: consideration following operative and non-operative management.

John DeWitt, Tim Vidale

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
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

2 authors.

John DeWittThe Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Tim VidaleHoward University, Washington Injury and Sports Performance Clinic, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PURPOSE/

backgroundHamstring injuries are common at all levels of sport, however recurrence rates are disproportionate compared to other soft tissue injuries. Age and previous injury are supported in the literature as risk factors for hamstring injury; nonetheless, debate exists regarding modifiable risk factors. Restoration of peak torque length using lengthening eccentrics and core stability interventions appear to reduce incidence of re-injury. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to review examination techniques and rehabilitation considerations in order to identify important risk factors to reduce recurrence after hamstring strain and total rupture. DISCUSSION/RELATION TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Novel clinical examination techniques both at time of acute injury and prior to return to sport may provide valuable prognostic information. Restoration of core stability, neuromuscular control and lengthening eccentric hamstring interventions are proposed key components to reduce hamstring re-injury. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level 5.

Indexed as

Eccentricshamstring injuryrecurrence risk factors

Identifiers

PMID25383248
PMCPMC4223289

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.