ArticleBMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation2026
Machine learning framework for predicting athletic injuries and optimising performance.
Article in BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation, 2026. 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
This paper describes an interpretable machine learning model to assess the risk of injury among multi-sport college athletes at the university level based on a publicly available collegiate dataset. The variables to be included in the dataset are workload, recovery, performance, and demographic factors of 200 athletes that represent various sports activities. A set of cross-validated models based on supervised learning such as Random Forest, XGBoost, and Artificial Neural Networks were trained with the stratified cross-validation, and the work of the Random Forest has shown the best performance (accuracy = 0.98; ROC-AUC = 0.97). Preprocessing involved scaling of features, categorical encoding, and inspection of outliers and no imputation was needed because all the data is available. Since explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI) methods, such as SHAP, were incorporated to help understand the model behaviour. The importance of features was shown to be greatest in ACL risk score, load balance score, fatigue score, and training hours, which suggests that the sports injury is multi-factorial in nature. The results point to early-warning indicators bankable on routine workload-recovery balance monitoring as opposed to the use of expensive wearable technology. This structure offers a pragmatic, replicable, and understandable model of injury prediction that could guide coaches and the practitioners in creating decisions based on information. Future directions in line with real-time monitoring and federated learning and external validation of more extensive athletic populations should be studied as future work.
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.