ArticleSports medicine and health science2024
Potential neurophysiological and biomechanical risk factors for sport-related back problems: A scoping review.
Article in Sports medicine and health science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spine Injuries in the NBA: Return to Play Expectations After a Seasonal Injury.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Review
- Editorial: Neurophysiological basis of the relationship between core stability and human movement: implications for sport and rehabilitation.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Evaluating Tech Neck: A Pilot Study Using a Self-Developed Questionnaire on Symptoms, Posture, and Preventive Measures.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Editorial: A physiologically-based approach to study different types of locomotion in association with core performance.Frontiers in physiology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This scoping review aims (1) to map the literature dealing with neurophysiological and biomechanical aspects of back problems in athletes in order to identify valid risk-factors for their prevention, plus (2) to identify gaps in the existing research and propose suggestions for future studies. A literature search conducted with Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library was completed by Elsevier, SpringerLink and Google Scholar. The main neurophysiological risk factors identified leading to back problems in athletes are neuromuscular imbalance, increased muscle fatigability, muscle dysfunction and impaired motor control, whilst biomechanical risk factors include maladaptive spinal, spinopelvic and lower limb kinematics, side-to-side imbalances in axial strength and hip rotation range of motion, spinal overloading and deficits in movement pattern. However, most studies focused on back pain in the lumbar region, whereas less attention has been paid to thoracic and cervical spine problems. The range of sports where this topic has been studied is relatively small. There is a lack of research in sports in which the core muscles are highly involved in specific movements such as lifting weights or trunk rotations. A limited number of studies include female athletes and master athletes of both genders. In addition to chronic back pain patients, it is equally important to conduct research on healthy athletes with a predisposition to spine problems. Investigators should focus their empirical work on identifying modifiable risk factors, predict which athletes are at risk for back problems, and develop personalized sport-specific assessment tools and targeted prevention strategies for them. This review was registered using the Open Science Framework Registries (https://osf.io/ha5n7).
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.