ReviewSports (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Pass Rates of Return to Sport Test Batteries Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Sports (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The association between return-to-sport test batteries (RTS-TBs) and clinical outcomes remains unclear. Previous systematic reviews of RTS-TBs have reported low pass rates; however, these reviews have been limited by substantial heterogeneity. This systematic review aimed to quantify RTS-TB pass rates and examine their association with timing (post-op). Five electronic databases (AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, PubMed) were searched on 22 December 2024. Observational studies reporting RTS-TB outcomes as a single pass or fail were included. A random-effects proportion meta-analysis was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of pass rates. A meta-regression was performed to assess the association between test timing and pass rate. Twelve studies (n = 1977) met the eligibility criteria, but five were excluded from the meta-analysis and meta-regression due to overlapping cohorts. From the remaining eight studies (n = 1449), the pooled prevalence of pass rates was 33% overall (95% CI 19 to 47%), 26% (95% CI 18 to 33%) for non-professional athletes, and 73% (95% CI 66 to 80%) for professional athletes, although only a single study focused on professional athletes. No association was observed between the post-operative timing of the test and passing RTS-TB (
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.