ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2024
Rates of Reporting and Analyzing Race and Ethnicity in Athlete-Specific Sports Medicine Research: A Systematic Review.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Female Saudi athletes' awareness of the importance of pelvic floor muscle exercises to prevent pelvic floor dysfunction: a cross-sectional online survey.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Do Anxiety, Depression, Fear of Movement and Fear of Achilles Rupture Correlate with Achilles Tendinopathy Pain, Symptoms or Physical Function?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Race- and ethnicity-based differences in treatment access and outcomes have been reported in the orthopaedic sports medicine literature. However, the rate at which race and ethnicity are reported and incorporated into the statistical analysis of sports medicine studies remains unclear. Purpose: To determine the rate at which race and ethnicity are reported and analyzed in athlete-specific sports medicine literature. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: Using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, articles published by the 3 journals of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine between 2017 and 2021 were considered for inclusion. Original sports medicine research studies that focused on athletes were included. Outcome measures included reporting and analysis of patient demographics (age, sex, race, ethnicity). Studies that included demographic variables in a multivariate analysis or that performed a race-/ethnicity-based stratified analyses were considered to have analyzed that variable. Studies that reported and/or analyzed patient demographics were examined. Chi-square tests were performed to determine statistical significance. Results: A total of 5140 publications were screened, and 842 met the inclusion criteria. Age and sex were well reported (84.1% and 87.0%, respectively), while race (3.8%) and ethnicity (2.0%) were poorly reported. There was no difference in rates of reporting age, sex, race, or ethnicity between the Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrated that race and ethnicity are poorly reported and analyzed in athlete-specific sports medicine literature, despite the fact that a majority of studies analyzing race found significant differences between racial groups. Improved reporting of race and ethnicity can determine whether race- and ethnicity-based differences exist in patient interventions to ameliorate disparities in patient outcomes.
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.