ArticleJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2025
Perceptions of ulnar collateral ligament injury in the online baseball community.
Article in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background and Hypothesis: The incidence of medial elbow ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) injuries is increasing in youth athletes with minimal data available regarding perception of these injuries within the baseball community. The purpose of this study was to define the baseline knowledge of the online baseball community regarding UCL injuries, and secondarily to evaluate a short educational intervention to increase understanding regarding UCL injuries. Methods: Participants were recruited through baseball-focused online discussion platforms over a 7-month period. A 15-question survey was administered to evaluate the primary outcome, assessing the online baseball community's perception of UCL anatomy, function, surgical indications, risks, and outcomes. An evidence-based 5-minute educational video and handout were then provided. A postintervention survey was administered to evaluate the secondary outcome. Demographic data were collected, and analysis of variance was used to assess between-subject differences. Repeated-measures analysis of variances compared preintervention and postintervention accuracy. Results: The primary survey was completed by 347 individuals. Most participants classified themselves as former athletes or fans (62%). Areas of misconceptions were identified pertaining to risk factors for injury (58.8% answered incorrectly) and postoperative outcomes (64.8% answered incorrectly). Only 41% of respondents, including 34% of coaches, correctly identified pitch counts as an appropriate means of reducing UCL injury risk. Baseline knowledge was relatively high (>90%) for basic anatomy and function. Respondents' accuracy increased significantly ( Conclusion: Misperceptions regarding UCL injury and management are prevalent within the online baseball community. Misperceptions regarding risk factors for injury were especially profound among those who identified as coaches, indicating opportunity for more targeted educational interventions. Further initiatives should be pursued to educate the baseball community regarding UCL injuries and management.
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.