ArticleJournal of athletic training2018
A Growing Consensus for Change in Interpretation of Clinical Research Evidence.
Article in Journal of athletic training, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Lateral Ankle Sprain and Subsequent Ankle Sprain Risk: A Systematic Review.Journal of athletic training · 2021Pooled it
- Compliance With the National Athletic Trainers' Association Inter-Association Task Force Preseason Heat-Acclimatization Guidelines in High School Football.Journal of athletic training · 2019Guideline
- Ankle-Joint Self-Mobilization and CrossFit Training in Patients With Chronic Ankle Instability: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of athletic training · 2020Trial
- Pre-academy knee pain as a predictor of overuse knee injuries in first-year military cadets.BMJ military health · 2025Article
- Article
- Reporting of Concussion Symptoms by a Nationwide Survey of United States Parents of Middle School Children.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Influence of State-Level Emergency Planning Policy Requirements on Secondary School Adoption.Journal of athletic training · 2020Article
- Point-of-Care Clinical Trials in Sports Medicine Research: Identifying Effective Treatment Interventions Through Comparative Effectiveness Research.Journal of athletic training · 2020Article
- Quadriceps tendon autograft ACL reconstruction has less pivot shift laxity and lower failure rates than hamstring tendon autografts.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2020Review
- Development and Validation of a Deep Learning Radiomics Model Predicting Lymph Node Status in Operable Cervical Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThe paradigm of evidence-based practice (EBP) is well established among the health care professions, but perspectives on the best methods for acquiring, analyzing, appraising, and using research evidence are evolving.
backgroundThe EBP paradigm has shifted away from a hierarchy of research-evidence quality to recognize that multiple research methods can yield evidence to guide clinicians and patients through a decision-making process. Whereas the "frequentist" approach to data interpretation through hypothesis testing has been the dominant analytical method used by and taught to athletic training students and scholars, this approach is not optimal for integrating evidence into routine clinical practice. Moreover, the dichotomy of rejecting, or failing to reject, a null hypothesis is inconsistent with the Bayesian-like clinical decision-making process that skilled health care providers intuitively use. We propose that data derived from multiple research methods can be best interpreted by reporting a credible lower limit that represents the smallest treatment effect at a specified level of certainty, which should be judged in relation to the smallest effect considered to be clinically meaningful. Such an approach can provide a quantifiable estimate of certainty that an individual patient needs follow-up attention to prevent an adverse outcome or that a meaningful level of therapeutic benefit will be derived from a given intervention.
conclusionsThe practice of athletic training will be influenced by the evolution of the EBP paradigm. Contemporary practice will require clinicians to expand their critical-appraisal skills to effectively integrate the results derived from clinical research into the care of individual patients. Proper interpretation of a credible lower limit value for a magnitude ratio has the potential to increase the likelihood of favorable patient outcomes, thereby advancing the practice of evidence-based athletic training.
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.