ArticleScandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports2026
RETRACTION: The Copenhagen Adduction Exercise Effect on Sport Performance and Injury Prevention: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis.
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. 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
- Retraction of
Authors and funding
0 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
retractionM. Quintana-Cepedal, O. de la Calle, P. Diez-Solorzano, B. Sanchez-Martinez, I. Crespo, and H. Olmedillas, "The Copenhagen Adduction Exercise Effect on Sport Performance and Injury Prevention: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis," Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports 35, no. 8 (2025): e70119, https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.70119. The above article, published online on 19 August 2025 in Wiley Online Library (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/), has been retracted by agreement between the authors; the journal Editor-in-Chief, José A. Calbet; and John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Following publication, the journal received concerns from a third party that the article contains an erroneous analysis, which was not detected during peer review. The journal editors investigated and determined that the meta-analysis misrepresents the reported outcomes of two out of the three cited studies, and contains fundamental methodological flaws that invalidate the article's conclusions. The authors resubmitted a revised version of their manuscript, which after peer review and careful evaluation was deemed unsuitable for publication in the journal. The article must therefore be retracted, without the possibility of publishing a correction.
Identifiers
41975640What 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.