SynthesisSports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2026
The Criteria and Design for Return-to-Play Following Muscle Injury in Football are Not Standardized: A Systematic Review Including Descriptive Analysis of RTP Criteria Distribution and Study Design Heterogeneity.
Synthesis in Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveReturn-to-play (RTP) decisions after muscle injury in professional football are complex, influenced by biological healing, functional recovery, and sport-specific demands. RTP models have evolved towards multifactorial and individualized frameworks; however, supporting evidence remains largely consensus-based. This systematic review aimed to describe RTP criteria and study design heterogeneity and integration within RTP frameworks in football.
methodsThis study was conducted as a systematic review. Studies investigating RTP criteria, RTP decision-making, or rehabilitation frameworks following muscle injuries in football players were included. Searches were performed in five databases. Two reviewers assessed risk of bias using Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tools. Ten studies included were classified as Classical-Physical, Consensus-Multifactorial, or Individualized RTP models.
resultsStudies reported a median of six RTP criteria (range 4-8); most commonly the absence of pain, ≥ 90% strength symmetry, and functional testing. Psychological readiness and GPS/on-field monitoring were reported after 2020 and were more frequent in multifactorial and individualized frameworks. A gradual shift towards multifactorial and individualized RTP frameworks was observed. No significant associations were identified between RTP model classification and individual RTP criteria (p > 0.05). Reinjury outcomes were rarely reported.
conclusionsThe literature shows heterogeneity in RTP criteria and study design after muscle injury, with consensus-based and low-level evidence predominating. RTP decision-making is grounded in expert opinion rather than outcome validation. RTP is a dynamic, multifactorial, and context-dependent process, integrating biological healing, functional recovery, psychological readiness, and load tolerance. Future research should prioritize prospective validation of integrated RTP frameworks and standardized outcome reporting. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD420251250364.
Identifiers
42570051What 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.