ArticleBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2024
Innovation in sport medicine and science: a global social network analysis of stakeholder collaboration in rugby union.
Article in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the network of stakeholders involved in rugby union research across the globe. Methods: Using author affiliations listed on scientific publications, we identified the organisations that contributed to rugby union research from 1977 to 2022 and examine collaboration through coauthorship indicators. We determined the locations and sectors of identified organisations and constructed a collaboration network. Network metrics, including degree centrality and betweenness centrality, are computed to identify influential organisations and measure intersector collaboration. Results: There is an increase in scientific knowledge creation and collaboration between organisations for rugby union research over time. Among the sectors, the university, professional sports team and sports governing body sectors exhibit the highest intersectoral and intrasectoral density. Predominantly, influential actors are located in England, Australia, France, New Zealand, Ireland and South Africa. Australian Catholic University, Leeds Beckett University, Stellenbosch University, Swansea University, University College London and the University of Cape Town emerge as influential actors between 2016 and 2022. Conclusions: Our study underscores the ongoing growth of scientific knowledge generation in rugby union, primarily led by organisations in tier 1 rugby-playing nations within the university sector. Intersectoral collaboration with sports governing bodies plays a crucial role, acting as a broker between sectors. However, the overall collaboration landscape between and within sectors is low. These results highlight an opportunity for improved collaboration opportunities, as the organisations driving knowledge creation have been identified.
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.