Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35852769›Full record

SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2022

Recreational Football and Bone Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Zoran Milanović, Nedim Čović, Eva Wulff Helge, Peter Krustrup, Magni Mohr

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

5 authors.

Zoran MilanovićFaculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Niš, Carnojeviceva 10a, 18000, Niš, Serbia. zoooro_85@yahoo.com.ORCID 0000-0002-3224-0506
Nedim ČovićFaculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.ORCID 0000-0002-1539-866X
Eva Wulff HelgeDepartment of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-4351-0137
Peter KrustrupDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, SDU Sport and Health Sciences Cluster (SHSC), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1461-9838
Magni MohrDepartment of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, SDU Sport and Health Sciences Cluster (SHSC), Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-1749-8533

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecreational football is an intense, versatile form of exercise with multiple high- and odd-impact actions. Recreational football is therefore hypothesized to be suitable for bone modeling and bone health.

objectiveThe aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of recreational football on bone mineral density (BMD), bone mineral content (BMC) and bone turnover markers (BTM).

designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Google Scholar were searched prior to September 2021. A manual database search was also performed using the following key terms, either singly or in combination: recreational football/soccer, street football/soccer, recreational small-sided games, effect, influence, impact, bone turnover markers, bone mineral density, bone turnover marker, bone health, osteogenesis, CTX, osteocalcin, P1NP. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised and matched controlled trials with participants allocated to a recreational football group or any other type of training intervention or passive control group were included. The primary outcome measures were total BMD, lower limb BMD, total BMC, lower limb BMC, osteocalcin, procollagen type 1N-terminal propeptide (P1NP) and collagen type 1 cross-linked C-telopeptide (CTX). A total of 17 papers met the inclusion criteria and were included. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Meta-analysis V.2 software (Biostat, Englewood, New Jersey, USA) was used for the meta-analyses. RISK OF BIAS: Agreement between the two reviewers was assessed using RoB2 tool and k statistics for full-text screening and rating of relevance and risk of bias. The k agreement rate between reviewers was k = 0.92.

resultsThe football interventions included were based on studies having a duration of 12-64 weeks with one 5-year follow-up study and with a training frequency of 1-3 sessions/wk. Training sessions were 45-60 min sessions of 3v3 - 7v7 small-sided games. The subjects covered an age span from 9 to 73 years. Five studies examined recreational football effects in females, nine studies in males and three studies included both sexes. Recreational football training produced a statistically significant effect (mean difference = 0.02 g/cm

conclusionIn conclusion, recreational football training regimes lasting 12-64 weeks have a large osteogenic impact on bone turnover markers in comparison with no-exercise controls as well as exercise controls, and beneficial effects on lower limb BMD compared to no-exercise controls. Short and medium duration recreational football interventions have negligible effects on whole-body BMD and BMC (total and lower limb), with magnitudes similar to those of other exercise modes.

Indexed as

SoccerAdolescentAdultAgedBone DensityChildFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteocalcinYoung AdultOsteocalcin

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.