Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32125672›Full record

ReviewSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2020

Analyzing Activity and Injury: Lessons Learned from the Acute:Chronic Workload Ratio.

Chinchin Wang, Jorge Trejo Vargas, Tyrel Stokes, Russell Steele, Ian Shrier

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Workload and Injury Risk of Professional Male Soccer Players.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Identifying contributory risk factors for neck pain in fast jet aircrew: a prospective cohort study.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

5 authors.

Chinchin WangCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, 3755 Côte Ste-Catherine Road, Montreal, QC, H3T 1E2, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8472-9936
Jorge Trejo VargasDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, H3A 0B9, Canada.
Tyrel StokesDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, H3A 0B9, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9305-1859
Russell SteeleDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, McGill University, 805 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, QC, H3A 0B9, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1071-0914
Ian ShrierCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, 3755 Côte Ste-Catherine Road, Montreal, QC, H3T 1E2, Canada. ian.shrier@mcgill.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9914-3498

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Injuries occur when an athlete performs a greater amount of activity than what their body can withstand. To maximize the positive effects of training while avoiding injuries, athletes and coaches need to determine safe activity levels. The International Olympic Committee has recommended using the acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) to monitor injury risk and has provided thresholds to minimize risk when designing training programs. However, there are several limitations to the ACWR and how it has been analyzed which impact the validity of current recommendations and should discourage its use. This review aims to discuss previously published and novel challenges with the ACWR, and strategies to improve current analytical methods. In the first part of this review, we discuss challenges inherent to the ACWR. We explain why using a ratio to represent changes in activity may not always be appropriate. We also show that using exponentially weighted moving averages to calculate the ACWR results in an initial load problem, and discuss their inapplicability to sports where athletes taper their activity. In the second part, we discuss challenges with how the ACWR has been implemented. We cover problems with discretization, sparse data, bias in injured athletes, unmeasured and time-varying confounding, and application to subsequent injuries. In the third part, conditional on well-conceived study design, we discuss alternative causal-inference based analytical strategies that may avoid major flaws in studies on changes in activity and injury occurrence.

Indexed as

WorkloadAthletic InjuriesExerciseHumansModels, TheoreticalRisk Factors

Identifiers

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.