SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2016
A Systematic Evaluation of Field-Based Screening Methods for the Assessment of Anterior Cruciate Ligament (ACL) Injury Risk.
Synthesis 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 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exercise-Based Training Strategies to Reduce the Incidence or Mitigate the Risk Factors of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury in Adult Football (Soccer) Players: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Comparison of stop-X and knee control training on side cut kinetics in futsal players with dynamic knee valgus: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Quantifying Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Resilience: A Screening and Composite Score Framework.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
- Effects of resisted movement training on change-of-direction speed in recreationally active and trained individuals: A systematic review with network meta-analysis and meta-regression.Journal of sport and health science · 2026Review
- Philippine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Periodic Health Examination: Screening for Musculoskeletal Disorders.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Rotational vs. Straight Landings: Exploring Task-Specific Responses to Inform ACL-Injury Risk Screening.Journal of human kinetics · 2026Article
- Old Habits Die Hard: Kinematic Carryover Between Low- and High-Impact Tasks in Active Females.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Do Different Two-Dimensional Camera Speeds Detect Different Lower-Limb Kinematics Measures? A Laboratory-Based Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Jumping and Landing Kinematics in Spanish Female Soccer Players: A Comparison Between Elite and Non-Elite Athletes.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Lower extremity functional performance tests and their measurement properties in athletes: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2025Article
- Landing Technique and Ankle-dorsiflexion Range of Motion are not Associated with the History of Lower Limb Injuries among Youth Basketball Athletes.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023Article
- Reliability of a Qualitative Instrument to Assess High-Risk Mechanisms during a 90° Change of Direction in Female Football Players.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Integrating neurocognitive challenges into injury prevention training: A clinical commentary.Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine · 2021Article
- Sensor-Based Indices for the Prediction and Monitoring of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Reliability Analysis and a Case Study in Basketball.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Observational
- Clinical Implications of Landing Distance on Landing Error Scoring System Scores.Journal of athletic training · 2021Article
- The Landing Error Scoring System (LESS) and Lower Limb Power Profiles in Elite Rugby Union Players.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2021Article
- Article
- Intra- and Inter-Rater Reliability of the Modified Tuck Jump Assessment.Journal of sports science & medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLaboratory-based measures provide an accurate method to identify risk factors for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury; however, these methods are generally prohibitive to the wider community. Screening methods that can be completed in a field or clinical setting may be more applicable for wider community use. Examination of field-based screening methods for ACL injury risk can aid in identifying the most applicable method(s) for use in these settings.
objectiveThe objective of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare field-based screening methods for ACL injury risk to determine their efficacy of use in wider community settings. DATA SOURCES: An electronic database search was conducted on the SPORTDiscus™, MEDLINE, AMED and CINAHL databases (January 1990-July 2015) using a combination of relevant keywords. A secondary search of the same databases, using relevant keywords from identified screening methods, was also undertaken. STUDY SELECTION: Studies identified as potentially relevant were independently examined by two reviewers for inclusion. Where consensus could not be reached, a third reviewer was consulted. Original research articles that examined screening methods for ACL injury risk that could be undertaken outside of a laboratory setting were included for review. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS
methodsTwo reviewers independently assessed the quality of included studies. Included studies were categorized according to the screening method they examined. A description of each screening method, and data pertaining to the ability to prospectively identify ACL injuries, validity and reliability, recommendations for identifying 'at-risk' athletes, equipment and training required to complete screening, time taken to screen athletes, and applicability of the screening method across sports and athletes were extracted from relevant studies.
resultsOf 1077 citations from the initial search, a total of 25 articles were identified as potentially relevant, with 12 meeting all inclusion/exclusion criteria. From the secondary search, eight further studies met all criteria, resulting in 20 studies being included for review. Five ACL-screening methods-the Landing Error Scoring System (LESS), Clinic-Based Algorithm, Observational Screening of Dynamic Knee Valgus (OSDKV), 2D-Cam Method, and Tuck Jump Assessment-were identified. There was limited evidence supporting the use of field-based screening methods in predicting ACL injuries across a range of populations. Differences relating to the equipment and time required to complete screening methods were identified. LIMITATIONS: Only screening methods for ACL injury risk were included for review. Field-based screening methods developed for lower-limb injury risk in general may also incorporate, and be useful in, screening for ACL injury risk.
conclusionsLimited studies were available relating to the OSDKV and 2D-Cam Method. The LESS showed predictive validity in identifying ACL injuries, however only in a youth athlete population. The LESS also appears practical for community-wide use due to the minimal equipment and set-up/analysis time required. The Clinic-Based Algorithm may have predictive value for ACL injury risk as it identifies athletes who exhibit high frontal plane knee loads during a landing task, but requires extensive additional equipment and time, which may limit its application to wider community settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.