Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35141342›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022

Risk of Concussion After a Targeting Foul in Collegiate American Football.

Douglas F Aukerman, Adam D Bohr, Sourav K Poddar, Russell Romano, David J Petron, Jamshid Ghajar, Christopher C Giza, Angela Lumba-Brown, Matthew B McQueen, Kimberly G Harmon

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Douglas F AukermanSports Medicine, Samaritan Health Services, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Adam D BohrDepartment of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Sourav K PoddarFamily Medicine and Orthopedics, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Russell RomanoAthletic Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
David J PetronDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Jamshid GhajarNeurosurgery, Brain Performance Center, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Christopher C GizaPediatrics and Neurosurgery, University of California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Angela Lumba-BrownDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Matthew B McQueenDepartment of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado, USA.
Kimberly G HarmonDepartment of Family Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe targeting rule was adopted by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) in 2008 to discourage dangerous contact during collegiate American football competition. Although targeting rules have been emphasized as a means to reduce concussion rates, there is currently no evidence that targeting plays are higher risk for concussion than other plays in American football. PURPOSE: To compare the rate of concussion occurring during targeting versus nontargeting plays in American collegiate football. STUDY

designCross-sectional study.

methodsConcussions occurring in games in the 2016-2019 Pac-12 Conference were classified as having occurred during either (1) a play where a targeting penalty was called or (2) all other plays. Targeting plays were further categorized to either those in which the call was upheld or those overturned by the on-field official after replay review. The number of targeting plays and the total number of plays during games were also recorded. Concussion incidence (per 1000 plays) and risk ratios were calculated.

resultsOverall, 538 games with 68,670 plays were reviewed, during which 213 concussions occurred (15 during plays where targeting was called and 198 on other plays) and 141 targeting penalties were called. The incidence of concussion was 106.4/1000 plays for targeting plays (including 141.2/1000 upheld targeting fouls and 53.6/1000 overturned targeting fouls) and 2.9/1000 plays for nontargeting plays. The risk of concussion during targeting plays was 36.9 (95% CI, 22.4-60.7) times greater than that for all other plays. The risk of concussion during targeting plays upheld was 49.0 (95% CI, 28.5-84.2) times greater than that for all other plays.

conclusionConcussion risk was significantly higher during plays in which targeting was called, especially those in which targeting fouls were upheld. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study supports eliminating or reducing targeting from American football. The results of this study suggest that players should be screened for concussion after targeting plays are called.

Indexed as

football (American)head injuries/concussioninjury preventiontargeting

Identifiers

PMID35141342
PMCPMC8819763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.