ArticleFrontiers in sports and active living2024
Headgear use in girls' lacrosse-stakeholders not ready for change.
Article in Frontiers in sports and active living, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevention strategies and modifiable risk factors for concussion: a systematic review and meta-analysis for the Female, woman and girl/or Athlete Injury pRevention (FAIR) consensus.British journal of sports medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Upper extremity lacrosse injuries presenting to United States emergency departments - 10 year review.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Mandating headgear for field players in girls' lacrosse to reduce head injuries, including concussion, has been heavily debated. However, research regarding the need and effectiveness of mandated headgear use in girls' lacrosse is still developing. Therefore, this qualitative study aimed to identify the need for and barriers to the development of mandated headgear use policies in girls' lacrosse in Ohio. Methods: We conducted six virtual focus groups, three with concussion experts (clinicians and researchers) and three with girls' lacrosse stakeholders (high school players, parents, coaches, and officials). A focus group guide was developed to explore study participants' perceptions and opinions on concussion in girls' lacrosse, headgear use among players, and policies and policy development related to headgear use or a headgear mandate. We developed the codebook using an inductive and iterative approach based on focus group transcripts and used ATLAS.TI to code and analyze the transcript data. Results: Concussion experts and stakeholders understood the potential consequences of concussion but did not perceive concussion as a pervasive problem in girls' lacrosse. The prevention of head and facial injuries was regarded as a potential benefit of headgear use. However, stakeholders expressed that the myriad of arguments discussed opposing mandated headgear use including increased aggressive play and/or targeting, concerns over changes in the game, and cost strongly outweighed the benefits. Finally, both concussion experts and stakeholders identified multiple organizations, including USA Lacrosse, who could act as facilitators and/or barriers to developing, enacting, and implementing headgear policies. Conclusions: Concussion experts and stakeholders identified possible reasons for headgear use related to injury prevention but also identified several important barriers to the development of a headgear mandate for girls' lacrosse in Ohio.
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.