ArticleBMJ open2021
Effects of sport-related repetitive subconcussive head impacts on biofluid markers: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Use of Biofluid Markers to Evaluate the Consequences of Sport-Related Subconcussive Head Impact Exposure: A Scoping Review.Sports medicine - open · 2024Article
- Repeated Sub-Concussive Impacts and the Negative Effects of Contact Sports on Cognition and Brain Integrity.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
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
introductionSport-related repetitive subconcussive head impacts (RSHIs) are increasingly thought to be associated with adverse long-term outcomes. However, owing to potentially subtle effects, accurate assessment of harm to the brain as a consequence of RSHI is a major challenge and an unmet need. Several studies suggest that biofluid markers can be valuable objective tools to aid the diagnosis and injury characterisation and help in medical decision-making. Still, by and large, the results have been limited, heterogeneous and inconsistent. The main aims of this scoping review are therefore (1) to systematically examine the extent, nature and quality of available evidence from studies investigating effects of RSHI on fluid biomarkers and (2) to formulate guidelines and identify gaps with the aim to inform future clinical studies and the development of research priorities. METHODS AND ANALYSES: We will use a comprehensive search strategy to retrieve all available and relevant articles in the literature. The following electronic databases will be systematically searched: MEDLINE (EBSCO host; from 1809 to 2020); Scopus (from 1788 to 2020); SPORTDiscus (from 1892 to 2020); CINAHL Complete (from 1937 to 2020); PsycINFO (from 1887 to 2020); Cochrane Library (to 2020); OpenGrey (to 2020); ClinicalTrials.gov (to 2020) and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (to 2020). We will consider primarily biomedical studies evaluating the biofluid markers following RSHI. Two independent reviewers will screen articles for inclusion using predefined eligibility criteria and extract data of retained articles. Disagreements will be resolved through consensus or arbitrated by a third reviewer if necessary. Data will be reported qualitatively given the heterogeneity of the included studies. In synthesising the evidence, we will structure results by markers, sample types, outcomes, sport and timepoints. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required. We will submit results for peer-review publication, and present at relevant conferences.
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.