ReviewCureus2025
A Comparison of Sports and Exercise Medicine Training for Physicians Across Five English-Speaking Countries.
Review in Cureus, 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
Sports and Exercise Medicine (SEM) has rapidly evolved into a formally recognised and important medical specialty that supports population health and tackles chronic disease burden in addition to injury prevention and optimisation of athletic performance. The specialty's establishment has adopted different timelines globally, and training pathways differ markedly across English-speaking countries, despite common clinical goals. In this review, we aim to provide a comparison between the postgraduate training pathways for physicians in SEM across five English-speaking countries highlighting the main differences, strengths and drawbacks of each pathway. This review will be able to guide future changes in the training pathway and inform aspiring trainees considering a career in SEM. Data on pathways to board certification in SEM, training program requirements, structure, duration, examinations and competition levels was collected from literature, official governing bodies' publicly available documents and online resources. Postgraduate training pathways in SEM vary internationally in structure, duration and content. The UK, Australia and New Zealand recognise SEM as a stand-alone specialty delivered through nationally standardised programs, providing sustained exposure across musculoskeletal, exercise and wider population health domains. The US and Canada offer SEM as a subspecialty via shorter fellowships delivering procedural focus and increased team medicine involvement but with greater variability in content and reduced emphasis on exercise medicine. Structured programs ensure curricular consistency and depth but require longer training and face high competition for posts. Fellowship models enable faster entry to independent practice and maintenance of dual specialty roles at the risk of narrowing clinical focus. Recognising the strengths and drawbacks of each pathway can inform refinement of SEM training internationally and guide aspiring SEM physicians in selecting pathways aligned with their career goals and the demands of both training and application processes.
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.