ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2021
Epidemiology of NCAA Bone Stress Injuries: A Comparison of Athletes in Divisions I, II, and III.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epidemiology of Bone-Stress Injuries and Health Care Use in Pac-12 Cross-Country Athletes.Journal of athletic training · 2024Article
- Wearable Devices and Digital Biomarkers for Optimizing Training Tolerances and Athlete Performance: A Case Study of a National Collegiate Athletic Association Division III Soccer Team over a One-Year Period.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBone stress injuries (BSIs) are a major source of functional impairment in athletes of all sports, with many risk factors, including athlete characteristics and type of sport. In National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) athletics, the stratification of programs into divisions with different characteristics and makeup has been identified as increasing the risk for certain kinds of injuries, but there have been no studies on the difference of BSI rates and characteristics between athletes in Division I (DI) and those in Divisions II and III (DII and DIII). PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: To characterize the BSI rates in each division and compare the incidence and characteristics of BSIs within divisions. Our hypothesis was that BSI rates would be higher in DII and DIII athletes as compared with DI athletes. STUDY
designDescriptive epidemiology study.
methodsFive years of recorded BSI data in collegiate athletes via the NCAA Injury Surveillance Program were examined for the academic years 2009-2010 to 2013-2014. BSI rates per 100,000 athlete-exposures (AEs) were compared for DI versus DII and DIII athletes using risk ratios and 95% CIs. Time lost to injury, time of season of injury, and class composition of injured athletes were also compared between divisions.
resultsOver the 5 years studied, DII and DIII programs reported 252 BSIs more than 1,793,777 AEs (14.05 per 100,000 AEs), and DI programs reported 235 BSIs over 2,022,592 AEs (11.62 per 100,000 AEs). The risk ratio was significant for D1 versus DII and DIII (1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.44). There was a significant difference in time lost to injury in DI versus DII and DIII, χ
conclusionIn the current study, NCAA DII and DIII athletes had higher rates of BSI than their DI counterparts. As compared with DII and DIII athletes, the DI athletes had a significantly greater proportion of BSIs that did not result in absence from participation in sport.
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.