ReviewBritish journal of sports medicine2025
Limitations of athlete-exposures as a construct for comparisons of injury rates by gender/sex: a narrative review.
Review in British journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three maxims for countering sex essentialism in scientific research.Biology of sex differences · 2025Review
- Gender/Sex Entanglement, Structural Sexism, and Injury: The Case of Australian Rules Football.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025Article
- Beyond the field: injury and illness patterns among Team USA athletes at the Paris 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games.BMJ open sport & exercise 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
High rates of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries in girls' and women's sports have garnered significant attention from researchers, sport organisations and the media. Gender/sex disparities in ACL injury rates are often estimated using the construct of athlete-exposures (AEs), a widely used measure of exposure time in sports science and epidemiology that is defined as one athlete participating in one practice or competition. In this narrative review, we explain the limitations of AEs as a measure of exposure time and develop a series of conceptual critiques regarding the use of AEs for the purposes of comparing injury rates by gender/sex. We show that the differing training-to-match ratio and average team size between women and men-rooted in persistent gendered inequities in sports participation and professionalisation-may jeopardise the validity of using AEs for cross-gender comparisons and skew gender/sex disparities in ACL injury rates. To avoid bias, we invite researchers interested in gender/sex disparities in injury rates to collect finer-grained data including individual-level AEs disaggregated by training and competition, as well as to appropriately control for team size and training-to-match ratio at the data analysis stage. Any quantitative comparisons of injury rates should also thoroughly contextualise the limitations of AEs, including their inability to capture the potential qualitative differences between women's and men's training and sporting environments that may influence injury rates.
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.