Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37905265›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

An Overview of Machine Learning Applications in Sports Injury Prediction.

Alfred Amendolara, Devin Pfister, Marina Settelmayer, Mujtaba Shah, Veronica Wu, Sean Donnelly, Brooke Johnston, Race Peterson, David Sant, John Kriak and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. [Progress and application of machine learning in sports injury research].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

11 authors.

Alfred AmendolaraFederated Department of Biology, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, USA.
Devin PfisterDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Marina SettelmayerDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Mujtaba ShahDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Veronica WuDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Sean DonnellyDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Brooke JohnstonDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Race PetersonDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
David SantDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
John KriakDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.
Kyle BillsDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, Noorda College of Osteopathic Medicine, Provo, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Use injuries, i.e., injuries caused by repetitive strain on the body, represent a serious problem in athletics that has traditionally relied on historic datasets and human experience for prevention. Existing methodologies have been frustratingly slow at developing higher precision prevention practices. Technological advancements have permitted the emergence of artificial intelligence and machine learning (ML) as promising toolsets to enhance both injury mitigation and rehabilitation protocols. This article provides a comprehensive overview of recent advances in ML techniques as they have been applied to sports injury prediction and prevention. A comprehensive literature review was conducted searching PubMed/Medline, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)/Institute of Engineering and Technology (IET), and ScienceDirect. Ovid Discovery and Google Scholar were used to provide additional aggregate results and a grey literature search. A focus was placed on papers published from 2017 to 2022. Algorithms of interest were limited to K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN), K-means, decision tree, random forest, gradient boosting and AdaBoost, and neural networks. A total of 42 original research papers were included, and their results were summarized. We conclude that given the current lack of open source, uniform data sets, as well as a reliance on dated regression models, no strong conclusions about the real-world efficacy of ML as it applies to sports injury prediction can be made. However, it is suggested that addressing these two issues will allow powerful, novel ML architectures to be deployed, thus rapidly advancing the state of this field, and providing validated clinical tools.

Indexed as

ai and machine learninginjury predictionmodelingsports injury preventionsports medicine

Identifiers

PMID37905265
PMCPMC10613321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.