Observational studyFrontiers in public health2026
Training exposure, recovery, and injury incidence among course-based and competitive university Wushu Taolu practitioners: a 12-week prospective cohort study.
Observational study in Frontiers in public health, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Whether the large training-exposure difference between course-based and competitive-team university Wushu Taolu practitioners in China translates into a correspondingly different musculoskeletal health burden has not been well characterized prospectively. Methods: In this observational, non-randomized cohort study, 255 practitioners (128 course-based, 127 university-team; mean age 20.7 ± 1.5) were followed over four waves (T0-T3) across 12 weeks, with training load, sleep, recovery, health problems, and injury recorded using recall windows matched to each variable's time-scale. Results: University-team practitioners had substantially higher training exposure than course-based practitioners. The 12-week cumulative incidence of new injury was substantially higher in university-team practitioners than in course-based practitioners (68.9% vs. 20.0%; Conclusion: University-team practitioners experienced a substantially greater absolute injury burden than course-based practitioners, whereas the between-group difference was much smaller when injury occurrence was expressed relative to estimated training exposure. Prior injury history was a strong marker of subsequent injury. Because group membership and training exposure were highly correlated and the study was observational, these findings should not be interpreted causally.
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.