Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33433864›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2021

Sex-Specific Differences in Running Injuries: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.

Karsten Hollander, Anna Lina Rahlf, Jan Wilke, Christopher Edler, Simon Steib, Astrid Junge, Astrid Zech

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 46 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Karsten HollanderMedical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany. karsten.hollander@medicalschool-hamburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5682-9665
Anna Lina RahlfDepartment of Human Movement Science and Exercise Physiology, Institute of Sport Science, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7498-6816
Jan WilkeDepartment of Sports Medicine and Exercise Physiology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9147-2369
Christopher EdlerPrevention, Rehabilitation and Interdisciplinary Sports Medicine, BG Trauma Hospital of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5263-330X
Simon SteibDepartment of Human Movement, Training and Active Aging, Institute of Sports and Sports Science, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5767-8205
Astrid JungeMedical School Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6815-9793
Astrid ZechDepartment of Human Movement Science and Exercise Physiology, Institute of Sport Science, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7147-4113

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft HO 6214/2-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRunning is a popular sport with high injury rates. Although risk factors have intensively been investigated, synthesized knowledge about the differences in injury rates of female and male runners is scarce.

objectiveTo systematically investigate the differences in injury rates and characteristics between female and male runners.

methodsDatabase searches (PubMed, Web of Science, PEDro, SPORTDiscus) were conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using the keywords "running AND injur*". Prospective studies reporting running related injury rates for both sexes were included. A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the risk ratios (RR) for the occurrence of injuries in female vs. male runners. Potential moderators (effect modifiers) were analysed using meta-regression.

resultsAfter removal of duplicates, 12,215 articles were screened. Thirty-eight studies were included and the OR of 31 could be pooled in the quantitative analysis. The overall injury rate was 20.8 (95% CI 19.9-21.7) injuries per 100 female runners and 20.4 (95% CI 19.7-21.1) injuries per 100 male runners. Meta-analysis revealed no differences between sexes for overall injuries reported per 100 runners (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90-1.10, n = 24) and per hours or athlete exposure (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, n = 6). Female sex was associated with a more frequent occurrence of bone stress injury (RR (for males) 0.52, 95% CI 0.36-0.76, n = 5) while male runners had higher risk for Achilles tendinopathies (RR 1. 86, 95% CI 1.25-2.79, n = 2). Meta-regression showed an association between a higher injury risk and competition distances of 10 km and shorter in female runners (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.00-1.69).

conclusionDifferences between female and male runners in specific injury diagnoses should be considered in the development of individualised and sex-specific prevention and rehabilitation strategies to manage running-related injuries.

Indexed as

RunningAthletesFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID33433864
PMCPMC8053184

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.