Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26691678›Full record

ReviewInjury epidemiology

From monocausality to systems thinking: a complementary and alternative conceptual approach for better understanding the development and prevention of sports injury.

Adam Hulme, Caroline F Finch

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Injury epidemiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 8 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Risk factors associated with quadbike crashes: a systematic review.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Injury Profile of Male and Female Senior and Youth Handball Players: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  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.

Adam HulmeAustralian Centre for Research into Injury in Sports and its Prevention (ACRISP), Federation University Australia, SMB Campus, PO Box 663, Ballarat, Victoria 3353 Australia.
Caroline F FinchAustralian Centre for Research into Injury in Sports and its Prevention (ACRISP), Federation University Australia, SMB Campus, PO Box 663, Ballarat, Victoria 3353 Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The science of sports injury control, including both its cause and prevention, has largely been informed by a biomedical and mechanistic model of health. Traditional scientific practice in sports injury research has routinely involved collapsing the broader socioecological landscape down in order to analyse individual-level determinants of injury - whether biomechanical and/or behavioural. This approach has made key gains for sports injury prevention research and should be further encouraged and allowed to evolve naturally. However, the public health, Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, and injury epidemiological literature more broadly, has accepted the value of a socioecological paradigm for better understanding disease and injury processes, and sports injury research will fall further behind unless it does the same. A complementary and alternative conceptual approach towards injury control known as systems thinking that builds on socioecological science, both methodologically and analytically, is readily available and fast developing in other research areas. This review outlines the historical progression of causal concepts in the field of epidemiology over the course of the modern scientific era. From here, causal concepts in injury epidemiology, and models of aetiology as found in the context of sports injury research are presented. The paper finishes by proposing a new research agenda that considers the potential for a systems thinking approach to further enhance sports injury aetiological understanding. A complementary systems paradigm, however, will require that sports injury epidemiologists bring their knowledge and skillsets forwards in an attempt to use, adapt, and even refine existing systems-based approaches. Alongside the natural development of conventional scientific methodologies and analyses in sports injury research, progressing forwards to a systems paradigm is now required.

Indexed as

Agent-Based ModellingApplied Human Factors and ErgonomicsSocioecological frameworksSports injury epidemiologySystems thinking

Identifiers

PMID26691678
PMCPMC4673096

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.