ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Sex Differences in Foot and Ankle Sports Injury Rates in Elite Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 25,687,866 Athlete Exposures.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Female sports participation is at an all-time high, from amateur to professional levels. There has been recent media and scientific focus on the higher rates of injury to the anterior cruciate ligament and head injuries in female athletes compared with male athletes. A similar association has not been emphasized in the foot and ankle. Hence, this research aims to establish the rate of foot and ankle injury at the professional level in female athletes compared with their male counterparts. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to understand the rate of foot and ankle injuries in professional and semiprofessional athletes. It was hypothesized that female athletes are injured at higher rates compared with their male counterparts. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. PubMed, Ovid EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE were searched for relevant papers up until October 23, 2023. Papers reporting on rates of foot and ankle injuries in female professional or semiprofessional athletes were included, along with a male comparison group. A total of 2510 papers were screened. A meta-analysis was performed on 4 separate subgroups using common and random-effects models. Results: A total of 53 papers met the inclusion criteria, and a meta-analysis of proportions was performed. Of this total, 21 records reported absolute elite athlete numbers and 32 reported athletic exposures. Meta-analyses were performed on these 2 subgroups separately. The literature was found to have a high risk of bias. The rate of injuries to the foot and ankle in female athletes was higher than their male counterparts overall (log odds ratio). Professional female athletes had significantly more injuries compared with their male counterparts using a common-effects model (odds ratio, 1.52 [1.44-1.61]) Chi-square testing demonstrated significant heterogeneity. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that female athletes suffer foot and ankle injuries at professional and semiprofessional competition levels at higher rates than their male counterparts. The literature on this topic is limited to large observational studies with significant risk of bias and heterogeneity. The current research provided an understanding of the significant effects of foot and ankle injury rates, detailing the increased exposures that are present in female semiprofessional and elite sports.
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.