ArticleBone & joint open2020
The use of biologics in professional and Olympic sport: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Bone & joint open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in female athlete-specific literature lacks standardization in outcome reporting : a scoping review.Bone & joint open · 2026Pooled it
- Blood flow restriction training before platelet-rich plasma preparation induces a significant reduction in its interleukin-6 levels: A pilot randomised controlled trial.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Allografts in primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction : a scoping review of the literature highlighting reporting standards.Bone & joint open · 2025Article
- Blood flow restriction-enhanced platelet-rich plasma: A pilot randomised controlled trial protocol.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Injection therapy in professional footballers.International orthopaedics · 2024Review
- Platelet-rich plasma intra-articular knee injections from open preparation techniques do not pose a higher risk of joint infection: A systematic review of 91 randomized controlled trials and 5914 injections.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Review
- The Use of Biologics in NFL Athletes: An Expert Consensus of NFL Team Physicians.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2023Article
- Diagnosis and treatment strategies of the multiligament injured knee : a scoping review protocol.Bone & joint open · 2022Article
- A solid and strong beginning.Bone & joint open · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe use of biologics in the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in Olympic and professional athletes appears to be increasing. There are no studies which currently map the extent, range, and nature of existing literature concerning the use and efficacy of such therapies in this arena. The objective of this scoping review is to map the available evidence regarding the use of biologics in the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in Olympic and professional sport.
methodsBest-practice methodological frameworks suggested by Arksey and O'Malley, Levac et al, and the Joanna Briggs Institute will be used. This scoping review will aim to firstly map the current extent, range, and nature of evidence for biologic strategies to treat injuries in professional and Olympic sport; secondly, to summarize and disseminate existing research findings; and thirdly, to identify gaps in existing literature. A three-step search strategy will identify peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature, including reviews, original research, and both published and unpublished ('grey') literature. An initial limited search will identify suitable search terms, followed by a search of five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) using keyword and index terms. Studies will be screened independently by two reviewers for final inclusion. DISSEMINATION: We will chart key concepts and evidence, and disseminate existing research findings to practitioners and clinicians, through both peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature, online platforms (including social media), conference, and in-person communications. We will identify gaps in current literature and priorities for further study.
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.