ReviewCureus2025
Biomechanical Evolution in Longitudinal Analysis of Lumbar Stress Injuries in Fast Bowlers: A Systematic Review.
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
Fast bowling involves a highly complex and physically demanding motion sequence, placing fast bowlers under substantially greater workloads than other cricketing roles. Consequently, they experience a disproportionately high incidence of injuries, particularly to the lower back, with lumbar stress fractures being especially common in adolescent bowlers. These injuries are multifactorial, arising from repeated exposure to high spinal loads, underscoring the need for comprehensive biomechanical analysis and targeted preventive strategies to enhance safety and prolong athletic careers. This systematic review synthesizes 15 years (2008-2023) of research to identify injury patterns and biomechanical contributors, aiming to inform safer, sustainable training practices. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar identified 21,550 records. After screening 21,406 titles and abstracts, 517 reports were sought for retrieval, and 491 were assessed for eligibility. Ultimately, 37 studies met the inclusion criteria. Eligible studies included prospective and retrospective cohort designs, analytical cross-sectional studies, and randomized controlled trials. Only peer-reviewed, full-text, English-language publications were considered, while case reports, reviews, and non-peer-reviewed articles were excluded. Screening and verification were conducted using RAYYAN and Mendeley, with an independent multi-reviewer assessment to ensure rigor. Findings highlight that shoulder counter-rotation exceeding 25°, trunk lateral flexion, and reduced knee flexion (<30°) at front-foot contact significantly elevate lumbar and lower-limb loading. Poor lumbopelvic control increases lumbar stress injury risk by up to 88%, whereas greater ankle dorsiflexion (>30°) demonstrates a protective effect via improved shock absorption. Preventive strategies should prioritize early biomechanical screening, workload regulation, and targeted lumbopelvic strengthening. Rehabilitation approaches must emphasize gradual workload progression and refined movement control, supported by long-term biomechanical monitoring to enhance performance and minimize injury risk.
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.