ReviewCureus2025
A Scoping Review of Exercises for Preventing Athletic Groin Pain.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Adductor-Related Athletic Groin Pain: A Clinical Commentary.International journal of sports physical therapy · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Groin pain is a frequent injury in multidirectional sports such as soccer, ice hockey, and Australian football. It commonly occurs during kicking, sprinting, and directional changes, yet preventive strategies remain poorly established. Although the Copenhagen Adduction Exercise (CAE) is widely adopted for groin pain prevention, evidence for other exercise options is limited. This scoping review aimed to identify and summarize exercise-based interventions used to prevent groin pain in athletes. The review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, and PEDro (1983-April 2025) using the key concepts "groin pain," "exercise," and "prevention." Only randomized and clinical trials published in English were included. After duplicate removal, 502 records were screened, and 19 studies met the eligibility criteria. Data were charted using Microsoft Excel, including study design, participant characteristics, intervention type, and outcomes. Two blinded reviewers assessed study quality using the PEDro scale. Descriptive and frequency-based analyses were performed to determine the most commonly implemented preventive exercises. In total, 19 randomized controlled trials were included, with an average PEDro score of 6.9 ± 1.2 (range = 5-9), indicating moderate methodological quality. The CAE was reported in 13 of 19 studies, showing improvements in adductor strength and, in some cases, reduced injury incidence. The Nordic hamstring exercise appeared in three studies, demonstrating benefits for strength and injury reduction. Additional programs such as the extended knee control program, abdominal and gluteus medius training, and trunk-hip coordination exercises were also identified. Counting the frequency of reported interventions revealed that CAE remains the most prevalent approach, while newer coordination-based or multi-joint programs show emerging evidence of benefit. Most studies focused on the CAE, indicating limited progress in groin pain prevention strategies. As CAE alone shows limited preventive effects, developing new, multifaceted exercise approaches is essential. This review was retrospectively registered in the Open Science Framework, relied solely on English-language publications, and included only published trials, which may introduce selection and publication bias.
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.