ArticleClinical and public health guidelines2025
Sports Pre-Participation Evaluation in Healthy Adults-A Survey-Based Assessment of Guideline Acceptability and Feasibility Among Sports Physicians and Participants.
Article in Clinical and public health guidelines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sports Preparticipation Evaluation for Healthy Adults: A Consensus-Based German Guideline.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Guideline
- Toward autonomous artificial intelligence agents in sports science: a modular framework for development, validation, and implementation.Biology of sport · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Sports pre-participation evaluations (PPEs) aim to identify people at increased risk of acute adverse events during physical activity. Little is known about their acceptability and feasibility among physicians and participants ('interest holders'). During the development of a consensus-based PPE guideline in Germany targeted at healthy adults who plan to take up or resume intense physical activity, we used surveys to assess interest holder perceptions of the acceptability and feasibility of the PPE, and to obtain their feedback on draft guideline recommendations. Methods: Cross-sectional online surveys were conducted separately in two interest holder groups. Acceptability was evaluated among adults (≥ 18 years) in Germany ('consumers'), the target population of the PPE guideline. Feasibility was investigated among potential guideline users, which included sports medicine specialists and general practitioners practising in Germany ('sports physicians'). Agreement with nine acceptability and feasibility statements was analysed descriptively. Comments on draft recommendations were collected and grouped thematically. Results: A total of 144 consumers and 204 physicians (186 with certification in sports medicine) completed the survey. Among the consumers, 82% would consider making use of a PPE, 8% were neutral, and 10% would not. Only 1% had 'concerns or reservations'. The main barrier was a potential non-reimbursement of the PPE by their health insurance (61%). Of the 186 certified sports physicians, 83% would offer or already offer a PPE, 12% were neutral, and 5% would not offer a PPE. Potential barriers were non-reimbursement by health insurers (20%), the required time and effort (13%), and qualification issues (14%). About half of the draft recommendations (11/23, 48%) were modified based on interest holder feedback. Discussion: Conducting consumer and end-user surveys as part of the guideline development process increased awareness of the main acceptability and feasibility issues, provided relevant suggestions to the draft recommendations, and identified considerations for guideline implementation.
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.