ReviewCureus2025
Risk Factors and Successful Interventions for Cricket-Related Low Back Pain: An Updated Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Case report-Stumped: back pain in a cricketer.South African journal of sports medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lower back pain (LBP) poses a significant challenge for cricketers of all standards, often leading to rehabilitation periods exceeding eight months and potential termination of the playing season. Despite the identification of modifiable risk factors and interventions in previous studies, a comprehensive review of the past decade is absent. With the introduction of shorter formats like Twenty20 (T20) and the rise of franchise cricket, an updated evaluation of risk factors and interventions for preventing and treating LBP in cricketers is needed. This study critically assesses and summarises current understanding in this area, incorporating previous recommendations and considering the evolving cricket landscape. A systematic review was conducted using databases such as SportsDiscus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Cochrane Library. Key terms related to LBP in cricketers were utilised. The Down and Black quality assessment tool, in addition to van Tulder's criteria for levels of evidence, was applied. The quantitative analysis involved meta-analyses conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 29 (Released 2023; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York). Sixteen studies, of which 15 were of high quality, investigated risk factors associated with LBP. One low-quality randomised controlled trial examined LBP treatment. The meta-analysis revealed significant associations between LBP and increased workload, decreased bone mineral density, and poor lumbo-pelvic control through increased side flexion during the bowling action. Strong evidence supported the association between the presence of bone marrow oedema (BMO) and LBP. Bone marrow oedema on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides an early indicator before the development of stress fractures, serving as a valid and reliable screening tool. Workload monitoring plays a crucial role in identifying high-risk bowlers. However, further research is needed to establish causal relationships among several other risk factors outlined. Additionally, addressing the scarcity of high-quality interventional studies is of utmost importance.
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.