ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023
Incidence of football injuries sustained on artificial turf compared to grass and other playing surfaces: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Differences in Injury Incidence Between Player Positions Across All Rugby Formats-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2025Pooled it
- [Incidence of Musculoskeletal Injuries in Natural and Artificial Turfs during the 2024 First Division of Brazilian Football Championship: A Retrospective Study].Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2026Article
- Incidence of Musculoskeletal Injuries in Natural and Artificial Turfs during the 2024 First Division of Brazilian Football Championship: A Retrospective Study.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2026Article
- Finnish Youth Footballers' Perceptions on Artificial Turf: A Survey Research.Health science reports · 2025Article
- No difference in sudden-onset injury risk between artificial turf and natural grass for Finnish female elite-level footballers: A five-season study.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- The Potential Release of Chemicals from Crumb Rubber Infill Material-A Literature Review.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
- Imaging and Surgical Procedures After Surface-Related Collegiate Football Injuries on Artificial Turf Versus Natural Grass: Prevalence and Trends Over 15 Seasons.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- INCREASED INCIDENCE OF INJURIES IN THE SÃO PAULO SOCCER CHAMPIONSHIP POST-PANDEMIC.Acta ortopedica brasileira · 2024Article
- Evaluation of surface type and time of day on agility course performance.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prior reviews have not conducted statistical synthesis of injury incidence on artificial turf in football. To analyse and compare the incidence of injuries sustained playing football (soccer) on artificial turf compared to grass and other playing surfaces. Methods: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases in October 2022 without filters. All observational studies (prospective or retrospective) that analysed injuries sustained playing football on artificial turf and which included a control group that played on grass or other surface were included. Studies were included if they reported the number of injuries and the exposure time for the playing surfaces. Risk of bias was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals. Protocol was registered with PROSPERO on October 30th, 2022. Registration number: CRD42022371414. Findings: We screened 1447 studies, and evaluated 67 full reports, and finally included 22 studies. Risk of bias was a notable issue, as only 5 of the 22 studies adjusted their analysis for potential confounders. Men (11 studies: IRR 0.82, CI 0.72-0.94) and women (5 studies: IRR 0.83, CI 0.76-0.91) had lower injury incidence on artificial turf. Professional players had a lower incidence of injury (8 studies: IRR 0.79, CI 0.70-0.90) on artificial turf, whereas there was no evidence of differences in the incidence of injury in amateur players (8 studies: IRR 0.91, CI 0.77-1.09). The incidence of pelvis/thigh (10 studies: IRR 0.72, CI 0.57-0.90), and knee injuries (14 studies: IRR 0.77, CI 0.64-0.92) were lower on artificial turf. Interpretation: The overall incidence of football injuries is lower on artificial turf than on grass. Based on these findings, the risk of injury can't be used as an argument against artificial turf when considering the optimal playing surface for football. Funding: No specific funding was received for this study.
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.