Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30954948›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of sports medicine2019

Online multifactorial prevention programme has no effect on the number of running-related injuries: a randomised controlled trial.

Tryntsje Fokkema, Robert-Jan de Vos, John M van Ochten, Jan A N Verhaar, Irene S Davis, Patrick J E Bindels, Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra, Marienke van Middelkoop

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of sports medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The Prevention and Treatment of Running Injuries: A State of the Art.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Tryntsje FokkemaDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands t.fokkema@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3767-2770
Robert-Jan de VosDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
John M van OchtenDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jan A N VerhaarDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Irene S DavisSpaulding National Running Center, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Patrick J E BindelsDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sita M A Bierma-ZeinstraDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Marienke van MiddelkoopDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo examine the effect of a multifactorial, online injury prevention programme on the number of running-related injuries (RRIs) in recreational runners.

methodsAdult recreational runners who registered for a running event (distances 5 km up to 42.195 km) were randomised into the intervention group or control group. Participants in the intervention group were given access to the online injury prevention programme, which consisted of information on evidence-based risk factors and advices to reduce the injury risk. Participants in the control group followed their regular preparation for the running event. The primary outcome measure was the number of self-reported RRIs in the time frame between registration for a running event and 1 month after the running event.

resultsThis trial included 2378 recreational runners (1252 men; mean [SD] age 41.2 [11.9] years), of which 1196 were allocated to the intervention group and 1182 to the control group. Of the participants in the intervention group 37.5% (95% CI 34.8 to 40.4) sustained a new RRI during follow-up, compared with 36.7% (95% CI 34.0 to 39.6) in the control group. Univariate logistic regression analysis showed no significant difference between the intervention and control group (OR 1.08; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.30). Furthermore, the prevention programme seemed to have a negative impact on the occurrence of new RRIs in the subgroup of runners with no injuries in the 12 months preceding the trial (OR 1.30; 95% CI 0.99 to 1.70).

conclusionA multifactorial, online injury prevention programme did not decrease the total number of RRIs in recreational runners. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR5998.

Indexed as

AdultAthletic InjuriesFemaleHumansInternetLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedProgram EvaluationRisk FactorsRunningSelf ReportSurveys and Questionnairesinjury preventionpreventionRunning

Identifiers

PMID30954948
PMCPMC6900232

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.