ArticleSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
The Effect of Changing Weekly Contact Training Duration Beyond Current Guidelines on Head Acceleration Events in Rugby Union.
Article in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2026. 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.
- Head Acceleration Event Exposure during Pre-Season Training in Elite Men's Rugby Union.Sports medicine - open · 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study simulated the effect of reducing contact training duration on overall in-season head acceleration event (HAE) exposure within men's and women's rugby union.
methodsPlayers (n = 982) from two professional men's and two semi-professional women's competitions wore instrumented mouthguards in training and match-play for one season. Generalised linear mixed models were used to estimate the in-season weekly HAE exposures per position, sex and contact type. Simulation of modelled estimates evaluated the impact of reducing contact load guidelines by 25%, 50% and 75% (scenario 1), and replacing full contact training with controlled contact (scenario 2) or non-contact (scenario 3) training for different seasonal match exposures. Previously established contact load guidelines were used as a reference point.
resultsHAEs were decreased by a maximum of 3.2 per week (0-95 HAEs per season; 0-23%). In scenario 1, the decrease in HAEs was disproportionately smaller than the reduction in contact training duration (e.g. 23.7% reduction in overall rugby minutes for 7% decrease in HAEs). Scenario 2 decreased HAEs similarly to scenario 1 but with no reduction in contact time. Scenario 3 decreased HAEs proportionally with contact time reductions (e.g. 8.9% decrease in HAEs >10 g for 9.6% reduction in overall rugby minutes).
conclusionsHAEs were reduced in all scenarios, but the reduction was relatively small due to the low overall rate of HAEs in training. Policymakers should be aware of the tradeoffs involved in any change. Managing individuals with higher HAE exposures may be more appropriate than reducing contact training guidelines.
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.