ArticleSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2021
Muscle Madness and Making a Case for Muscle-Specific Classification Systems: A Leap from Tissue Injury to Organ Injury and System Dysfunction.
Article in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound-based classification and rehabilitation of biceps femoris T-junction injuries.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2026Article
- Calf Strains in Athletes: A Narrative Review of Management, Injury Grading, and Return to Sport.Sports medicine - open · 2025Review
- Past, present, and future in sports imaging: how to drive in a three-lane freeway.European radiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the recent publication and subsequent clinical application of several muscle injury classification systems, none has been able to address the varying and often unique/complex types of injuries that occur in different muscles. Although there are advantages of using a unified classification, there are significant differences between certain muscles and muscle groups. These differences may complicate the clinical effectiveness of using a unified injury classification. This narrative explores the difficulties in using a single classification to describe the heterogeneous nature of muscle injuries. Within that context, the possibility of viewing muscles and muscle injuries in the same manner as other biological tissues, structures, organs, and systems is discussed. Perhaps, in addition to a unified classification, subclassifications or muscle specific classifications should be considered for certain muscles. Having a more specific (granular) approach to some of the more commonly injured muscles may prove beneficial for more accurately and effectively diagnosing and treating muscle injuries. Ideally, this will also lead to more accurate determination of the prognosis of specific muscle injuries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33332013What 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.