Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35141549›Full record

ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2022

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Rehabilitation and Return to Sport: How Fast Is Too Fast?

Kristen Waldron, Matthew Brown, Ariana Calderon, Michael Feldman

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. What is the impact of Kinesio taping on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Return To Sport Following ACL Reconstruction.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Kristen WaldronBodyCentral Physical Therapy, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A.
Matthew BrownBodyCentral Physical Therapy, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A.
Ariana CalderonBodyCentral Physical Therapy, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A.
Michael FeldmanUniversity of Arizona College of Medicine, Banner University Medical Center, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article summarizes the benefits and limitations of various approaches of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rehabilitation, more specifically a conservative or traditional rehabilitation approach versus a more accelerated approach. The conservative model is considered one with a return to sport at 9 months or later with more time-based criteria, and an accelerated approach is defined as one with a goal of return to sport by 6 months. Although there are some similarities between the 2 types of rehabilitation, key differences exist and will be highlighted. Additionally, we discuss a criteria-based return-to-sport model that we favor. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V, expert opinion.

Identifiers

PMID35141549
PMCPMC8811519

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.