ArticleScandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports2026
Countermovement Jump Force-Time Mechanics Differentiate ACL Injury Status in Elite Alpine Ski Racers.
Article in Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports, 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.
- Free-fall normalised peak braking velocity for countermovement jump monitoring.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biomechanical assessments of stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) movements such as the countermovement jump (CMJ) are used to evaluate neuromuscular function in alpine ski racers after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). However, this analysis yields multiple CMJ force-time metrics that quantify SSC mechanics, creating challenges for data synthesis, interpretation, and return-to-sport decision making. Machine learning (ML) classification algorithms address this problem by determining patterns that distinguish healthy control athletes and athletes recovering from ACLR. ML classification algorithms were trained using CMJ force-time metrics obtained from healthy control elite alpine ski racers (Control) and skiers tested after ACLR to identify features predictive of group membership. Participants (ACLR: n = 24, Control: n = 42) performed multiple CMJ testing sessions as part of a longitudinal athlete monitoring program (n = 836). ML algorithms (random forest, support vector machine, logistic regression, naïve Bayes, k-nearest neighbors) were trained using 23 CMJ force-time features with 5-fold cross-validation and evaluated using an independent test dataset. Classification performance was high with balanced accuracies ranging from 0.59 to 0.88 and areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.63-0.95. Features corresponding to the propulsion phase were most important for differentiating CMJ tests from ACLR and Control athletes. Recovery of neuromuscular function after ACLR may be inferred when the CMJ mechanics of athletes with ACLR become indistinguishable from those of healthy controls. In conclusion, ML classification models may assist interpretation of CMJ force-time metrics after ACLR by identifying high-information features related to injury status along with a potential indication of rehabilitation progression relative to healthy control athletes.
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.