ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Bone Mineral Density in Field Hockey Players: A Systematic Review.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 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
Abstract
The aim of this study was to carry out a systematic review to compare and analyse the bone mineral density of field hockey players of both sexes and of different ages, with other sports and with a sedentary population. The search process was carried out using the PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and Scopus databases. The search ended on 18 March 2024. We selected articles in which a comparison was made of bone mineral density of the whole body, lumbar spine, femoral neck, arms and legs, among field hockey players, and/or with other sports and/or with a sedentary population. The systematic review followed the guidelines described in the 2020 PRISMA statement. The initial search identified 220 articles. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the search was narrowed down to seven articles in total. It was observed that the field hockey group had better bone mineral density values than sedentary population and the low-impact sports population. Basketball players had better whole body and leg bone mineral density values than field hockey players. Causality could not be established due to the cross-sectional nature of the included studies. The better bone mineral density values in field hockey players compared to the sedentary population may be because people who participate in impact sports have a better bone mineral density. The differences in bone mineral density between field hockey and low-impact sports could be related to a lower impact during their practice in these disciplines.
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.