ArticleSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2024
Athletic Injury Research: Frameworks, Models and the Need for Causal Knowledge.
Article in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A study on risk factors for the progression from T2DM to end-stage renal disease based on Mendelian randomization and logistic regression analysis.Renal failure · 2026Article
- The Heel-Strike Fallacy and Cadence Beliefs in Distance Running: A Narrative Review.Sports medicine - open · 2026Review
- Towards High-Accuracy Athletic Injury Predictions Using a First-Principles Modelling Approach: Theory to (Future) Practice.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- From Evidence to Application: An Operational Extension of Existing Sports Injury Frameworks for Sports Medicine Practitioners.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- Developing a Fundamental Theoretical Definition for Athletic Injury: Metaphysics, Logic, and Mathematics.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- An Overarching Conceptual Framework for Menstrual Health in Sport Research: Theory, Causality and Validation.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2026Review
- A new conceptual framework for managing hamstring injury risk in soccer - implementing a data-informed approach: a narrative review.Biology of sport · 2026Review
- The Natural History of Bone Stress Injuries in Athletes: From Inception to Resolution.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Review
- Sit-and-Reach Pose Detection Based on Self-Train Method and Ghost-ST-GCN.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A causal inference method for athletic injuries based on quantile threshold functions and latent Gaussian DAG models.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Editorial: Return to sport (RTS): identifying injury risk factors, diagnostics and treatment process.Frontiers in medicine · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Within applied sports science and medicine research, many challenges hinder the establishment and detailed understanding of athletic injury causality as well as the development and implementation of appropriate athletic injury prevention strategies. Applied research efforts are faced with a lack of variable control, while the capacity to compensate for this lack of control through the application of randomised controlled trials is often confronted by a number of obstacles relating to ethical or practical constraints. Such difficulties have led to a large reliance upon observational research to guide applied practice in this area. However, the reliance upon observational research, in conjunction with the general absence of supporting causal inference tools and structures, has hindered both the acquisition of causal knowledge in relation to athletic injury and the development of appropriate injury prevention strategies. Indeed, much of athletic injury research functions on a (causal) model-blind observational approach primarily driven by the existence and availability of various technologies and data, with little regard for how these technologies and their associated metrics can conceptually relate to athletic injury causality and mechanisms. In this article, a potential solution to these issues is proposed and a new model for investigating athletic injury aetiology and mechanisms, and for developing and evaluating injury prevention strategies, is presented. This solution is centred on the construction and utilisation of various causal diagrams, such as frameworks, models and causal directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), to help guide athletic injury research and prevention efforts. This approach will alleviate many of the challenges facing athletic injury research by facilitating the investigation of specific causal links, mechanisms and assumptions with appropriate scientific methods, aiding the translation of lab-based research into the applied sporting world, and guiding causal inferences from applied research efforts by establishing appropriate supporting causal structures. Further, this approach will also help guide the development and adoption of both relevant metrics (and technologies) and injury prevention strategies, as well as encourage the construction of appropriate theoretical and conceptual foundations prior to the commencement of applied injury research studies. This will help minimise the risk of resource wastage, data fishing, p-hacking and hypothesising after the results are known (HARK-ing) in athletic injury research.
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.