ArticleBMJ open sport & exercise medicine2026
Psycho-social-contextual landscape of return to sport after hamstring strain injuries: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Hamstring strain injuries (HSI) are a leading cause of time loss and reinjury in elite sport, yet return-to-sport (RTS) decisions remain largely based on physical criteria. This scoping review aimed to map the psychological, social and contextual factors associated with RTS after HSI and to examine how psychological readiness has been conceptualised in RTS after HSI. Methods: Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, seven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Scopus and ProQuest) were systematically searched for studies published until September 2025 in five languages. Eligible studies included original research identifying or describing psychological, social or contextual factors influencing RTS after HSI. Methodological quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool and the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Data were synthesised thematically. Results: 10 studies (n=663 participants, mostly in elite football) met the inclusion criteria. Three overarching domains were identified. Psychological factors were most frequently reported, including anxiety, fear of reinjury or failure and self-perceived readiness, as well as motivation and self-efficacy. Social factors encompassed therapeutic alliance, communication within the rehabilitation team and hierarchical dynamics within professional environments. Contextual factors referred to situational and organisational influences such as season timing, resource availability and operational practices. Psychological readiness was inconsistently defined and typically assessed informally rather than through validated instruments. Conclusions: Psychological, social and contextual factors are under-screened in RTS after HSI. Incorporating structured psychosocial screening and shared decision-making alongside physical criteria may improve RTS safety and sustainability. Athlete-centred research is warranted to refine the assessment of psychological readiness and inform holistic, context-sensitive RTS frameworks.
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.