Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25706955›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

Injuries in runners; a systematic review on risk factors and sex differences.

Maarten P van der Worp, Dominique S M ten Haaf, Robert van Cingel, Anton de Wijer, Maria W G Nijhuis-van der Sanden, J Bart Staal

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04901442 (A Randomised Control Trial to Compare Comfort, Rate of Injury and Speed While Running Using Prefabricated Orthotic Inserted Into Running Shoes vs Running With no Additional Orthotic Inside the Running Shoe), which is not on this map. Cited by 137 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
137citing papers in PubMed, 18 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.

NCT04901442 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Randomised Control Trial to Compare Comfort, Rate of Injury and Speed While Running Using Prefabricated Orthotic Inserted Into Running Shoes vs Running With no Additional Orthotic Inside the Running Shoe

TypeinterventionalSponsorTalita Cumi Ltd.Ran2021 to 2022Enrolled106ConditionsRunning Comfort, Running Speed, Occurence of Running Related InjuriesArmsAetrex L700 Speed orthotic
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

137 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Running shoes for preventing lower limb running injuries in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Prognostic factors for outcome following lumbar spine fusion surgery: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

77 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Maarten P van der WorpAcademic Institute, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Department of Physical Therapy, Utrecht, the Netherlands; HAN, University of Applied Sciences Nijmegen, Institute Health Studies, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Science, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Dominique S M ten HaafHAN, University of Applied Sciences Nijmegen, Institute Health Studies, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Robert van CingelHAN, University of Applied Sciences Nijmegen, Institute Health Studies, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Sport Medical Center Papendal, Arnhem, the Netherlands.
Anton de WijerAcademic Institute, University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Department of Physical Therapy, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Science, Department of Oral Function & Prosthetic Dentistry, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Maria W G Nijhuis-van der SandenRadboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Science, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Science, Department of Rehabilitation, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
J Bart StaalHAN, University of Applied Sciences Nijmegen, Institute Health Studies, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute for Health Science, Scientific Institute for Quality of Healthcare, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe popularity of running continues to increase, which means that the incidence of running-related injuries will probably also continue to increase. Little is known about risk factors for running injuries and whether they are sex-specific.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to review information about risk factors and sex-specific differences for running-induced injuries in adults. SEARCH STRATEGY: The databases PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and Psych-INFO were searched for relevant articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Longitudinal cohort studies with a minimal follow-up of 1 month that investigated the association between risk factors (personal factors, running/training factors and/or health and lifestyle factors) and the occurrence of lower limb injuries in runners were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers' independently selected relevant articles from those identified by the systematic search and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies. The strength of the evidence was determined using a best-evidence rating system. Sex differences in risk were determined by calculating the sex ratio for risk factors (the risk factor for women divided by the risk factor for men). MAIN

resultsOf 400 articles retrieved, 15 longitudinal studies were included, of which 11 were considered high-quality studies and 4 moderate-quality studies. Overall, women were at lower risk than men for sustaining running-related injuries. Strong and moderate evidence was found that a history of previous injury and of having used orthotics/inserts was associated with an increased risk of running injuries. Age, previous sports activity, running on a concrete surface, participating in a marathon, weekly running distance (30-39 miles) and wearing running shoes for 4 to 6 months were associated with a greater risk of injury in women than in men. A history of previous injuries, having a running experience of 0-2 years, restarting running, weekly running distance (20-29 miles) and having a running distance of more than 40 miles per week were associated with a greater risk of running-related injury in men than in women.

conclusionsPrevious injury and use of orthotic/inserts are risk factors for running injuries. There appeared to be differences in the risk profile of men and women, but as few studies presented results for men and women separately, the results should be interpreted with caution. Further research should attempt to minimize methodological bias by paying attention to recall bias for running injuries, follow-up time, and the participation rate of the identified target group.

Indexed as

AdultAthletic InjuriesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsRunningSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID25706955
PMCPMC4338213

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.