ReviewBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2020
Association of artificial turf and concussion in competitive contact sports: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Incidence and Risk Factors for Sport-Related Concussion in Female Youth Athletes Participating in Contact and Collision Invasion Sports: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Pooled it
- Do Climate and Environmental Characteristics Influence Concussion Incidence in Outdoor Contact Sports? A Systematic Review.Journal of athletic training · 2023Pooled it
- Head Games: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Examining Concussion and Head Impact Incidence Rates, Modifiable Risk Factors, and Prevention Strategies in Youth Tackle Football.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2022Pooled it
- Impact Deceleration Differences on Natural Grass Versus Synthetic Turf High School Football Fields.Hawai'i journal of health & social welfare · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the incidence of head injuries and concussion in contact sports, comparing natural grass with artificial turf surfaces.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis via the RevMan V.5.3 software. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: All studies describing competitive contact sports played on both natural grass and artificial turf. The primary outcome measured was occurrence of head injury and concussion. DATA SOURCES: The databases include PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Medline and Sport Discus. The last search took place on 23 May 2019. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale evaluated the methodological quality of the selected studies with a funnel plot designed to determine publication bias. Study screening and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers.
resultsInitial screening generated 42 publications, with 12 meeting criteria for inclusion. Eight studies described concussion only. The rate ratio (RR) of head injury and concussion was less on artificial turf compared with natural grass (RR=0.89, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.04) as was the rate ratio of concussion only (RR=0.72, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.89).
conclusionAnalysis of published data demonstrates a decreased incidence of head injury and concussion when contact sports are played on artificial turf. This difference was most marked for sports such as rugby and American football. However, artificial turf has no association with the incidence of head injury or concussion while playing soccer.
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.