ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2021
Quantification of the demands of cricket bowling and the relationship to injury risk: a systematic review.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07440823 (Effects of Accentuated Eccentric Versus Concentric Training on Upper Arm Muscle Girth, Strength and Power in Fast Bowlers), which is not on this 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.
Effects of Accentuated Eccentric Versus Concentric Training on Upper Arm Muscle Girth, Strength and Power in Fast Bowlers
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk Factors and Successful Interventions for Cricket-Related Low Back Pain: An Updated Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Quantification of Ground Reaction Forces During the Follow Through in Trained Male Cricket Fast Bowlers: A Laboratory-Based Study.Sports (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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBowling in cricket is a complex sporting movement which, despite being well characterised, still produces a significant number of injuries each year. Fast bowlers are more likely to be injured than any other playing role. Frequency, duration, intensity and volume of bowling, which have been generalised as measurements of workload, are thought to be risk factors for injuries. Injury rates of fast bowlers have not reduced in recent years despite the implementation of various workload monitoring practices.
objectiveTo identify the variables used to quantify frequency, intensity, time and volume of bowling; and evaluate relationships between these variables and injury risk.
methodsSix online databases were systematically searched for studies on fast bowling that included terms related to workload. Population characteristics, variables relating to demand and their relationship to standardised definitions of physical activity were extracted from all included studies.
resultsBowling workload is typically quantified through measures of frequency, duration, or indirect intensity, with few studies reporting on bowling volume.
conclusionsWhen reported on, volume was often described using imprecise or insufficient measures of intensity. There is a need to develop more appropriate measures of intensity during bowling and improve the quality of evidence to inform on bowling programme management practices.
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.