ReviewSports medicine - open2025
Evolution of Research Published in Sports and Exercise Medicine Journals: A Quantitative Analysis of Global Trends.
Review in Sports medicine - open, 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.
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
backgroundSports and exercise medicine is important in the prevention, diagnosis, and management of a variety of musculoskeletal presentations and injuries as well as aiding athletes' recovery and enhancing public health by promoting physical activity for all. It has evolved from a subspecialty into a distinct interdisciplinary domain. Using scientometric analysis, this study examines sports and exercise medicine's scope, history, current landscape and future directions. Utilising data from the Web of Science, covering 150,380 publications up to November 2022, trends from the early 1970s to 2022 are analysed. MAIN
findingsThere was gradual growth in the field between 1980 and 2000 and a significant surge post-2000. The study reveals global distribution, with the United States contributing over half of the field's output. However, questions arise about international collaboration and resource allocation. Citespace analysis visualises 26 research streams in sports and exercise medicine, with many emerging around 2000, showcasing adaptability to trends. Document co-citation and citation burst analyses highlight pivotal moments in sports medicine's intellectual history and foundational knowledge. Semantic analysis categorises sports medicine into four primary divisions: Exercise, Lower limb injuries, Physical activity, and Biomechanics in sport, emphasising its multidisciplinary nature.
conclusionsThis scientometric analysis highlights sports medicine's evolution into a diverse, interdisciplinary field, with significant growth since 2000. By identifying and mapping trends, global contributions, and key research themes (Exercise variables, Lower limb injuries, Sports dynamics, and Biomechanics) this study provides valuable insights for guiding collaboration, research, and resource allocation to advance athletes' well-being and health at a population level. KEY POINTS: Sports and exercise medicine research has seen steady growth since the 1970s, with peaks in publication numbers, notably in 2020, followed by a decline attributed to changes in publication indexing practices. Analysis reveals a diverse array of 26 distinct research streams, evolving from a singular focus on anaerobic capacity to encompass modern topics like concussion management and sports psychology.
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.