Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25394420›Full record

ReviewBritish journal of sports medicine2015

Classification and grading of muscle injuries: a narrative review.

Bruce Hamilton, Xavier Valle, Gil Rodas, Luis Til, Ricard Pruna Grive, Josep Antoni Gutierrez Rincon, Johannes L Tol

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in British journal of sports medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07566039 (Prospective Cohort Study of Athletes Following an Injection of Platelet-Poor Plasma Into an Acute Muscle Injury), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT07566039 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Prospective Cohort Study of Athletes Following an Injection of Platelet-Poor Plasma Into an Acute Muscle Injury

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Colorado, DenverRan2026 to 2030Enrolled90ConditionsLower Extremity InjuryArmsPlatelet Poor Plasma (PPP) Injection
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. CNanomedicine (London, England) · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. CInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Factors, mechanisms and improvement methods of muscle strength loss.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Tears of biceps femoris, semimembranosus, and semitendinosus are not equal-a new individual muscle-tendon concept in athletes.Scandinavian journal of surgery : SJS : official organ for the Finnish Surgical Society and the Scandinavian Surgical Society · 2021
    Review
  20. 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

7 authors.

Bruce HamiltonMedical Lead HPSNZ, National Training Centre, Millenium Institute of Sport and Health, Auckland, New Zealand.
Xavier ValleF.C. Barcelona Medical Services, Barcelona, Spain Sports Medicine School, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain Clinica Mapfre de Medicina del Tenis, Barcelona, Spain.
Gil RodasSports Medicine School, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Luis TilF.C. Barcelona Medical Services, Barcelona, Spain.
Ricard Pruna GriveF.C. Barcelona Medical Services, Barcelona, Spain.
Josep Antoni Gutierrez RinconF.C. Barcelona Medical Services, Barcelona, Spain.
Johannes L TolSports Medicine Department, Aspetar, Qatar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha, Qatar.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A limitation to the accurate study of muscle injuries and their management has been the lack of a uniform approach to the categorisation and grading of muscle injuries. The goal of this narrative review was to provide a framework from which to understand the historical progression of the classification and grading of muscle injuries. We reviewed the classification and grading of muscle injuries in the literature to critically illustrate the strengths, weaknesses, contradictions or controversies. A retrospective, citation-based methodology was applied to search for English language literature which evaluated or utilised a novel muscle classification or grading system. While there is an abundance of literature classifying and grading muscle injuries, it is predominantly expert opinion, and there remains little evidence relating any of the clinical or radiological features to an established pathology or clinical outcome. While the categorical grading of injury severity may have been a reasonable solution to a clinical challenge identified in the middle of the 20th century, it is time to recognise the complexity of the injury, cease trying to oversimplify it and to develop appropriately powered research projects to answer important questions.

Indexed as

ClassificationDiagnostic ImagingForecastingHumansMuscle, SkeletalPrognosisTerminology as TopicHamstringMRIMuscle damage/injuriesUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID25394420
PMCPMC4387470

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.