Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26604102›Full record

ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2016

The Biomechanics of the Modern Golf Swing: Implications for Lower Back Injuries.

Michael H Cole, Paul N Grimshaw

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Return to Golf after corrective surgery in adult spinal deformity patients with long fusion constructs: A retrospective case series.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 · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Human-Inspired Control of a Whip: Preparatory Movements Improve Hitting a Target.Proceedings of the ... IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics. IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Epidemiology of Musculoskeletal Injuries in Golf Athletes: A Championship in Portugal.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael H ColeSchool of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, Virginia, P.O. Box 456, Brisbane, QLD, 4014, Australia. michael.cole@acu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1817-7528
Paul N GrimshawSchool of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Australian Catholic University · AUThe University of Adelaide · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The modern golf swing is a complex and asymmetrical movement that places an emphasis on restricting pelvic turn while increasing thorax rotation during the backswing to generate higher clubhead speeds at impact. Increasing thorax rotation relative to pelvic rotation preloads the trunk muscles by accentuating their length and allowing them to use the energy stored in their elastic elements to produce more power. As the thorax and pelvis turn back towards the ball during the downswing, more skilled golfers are known to laterally slide their pelvis toward the target, which further contributes to final clubhead speed. However, despite the apparent performance benefits associated with these sequences, it has been argued that the lumbar spine is incapable of safely accommodating the forces they produce. This notion supports a link between the repeated performance of the golf swing and the development of golf-related low back injuries. Of the complaints reported by golfers, low back injuries continue to be the most prevalent, but the mechanism of these injuries is still poorly understood. This review highlights that there is a paucity of research directly evaluating the apparent link between the modern golf swing and golf-related low back pain. Furthermore, there has been a general lack of consensus within the literature with respect to the methods used to objectively assess the golf swing and the methods used to derived common outcome measures. Future research would benefit from a clear set of guidelines to help reduce the variability between studies.

Indexed as

Athletic InjuriesBack InjuriesBiomechanical PhenomenaElectromyographyGolfHumansLow Back PainMovementPelvisRange of Motion, ArticularRotationThorax

Identifiers

PMID26604102
OpenAlexW2180929767

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.