Parental Awareness and Attitudes Towards ACL Injury Prevention Programs in Youth Athletes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The incidence of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries has steadily increased in young athletes and may have long-term implications for physical function and quality of life. ACL injury prevention programs have been developed and refined over the past several decades and have been shown to reduce the risk of ACL injuries by up to 70%1,2. However, awareness and understanding of these programs among parents of athletes is unknown. This study aims to evaluate knowledge and attitudes towards ACL injury prevention programs for parents of young athletes involved in cutting and pivoting sports at varying levels of competition. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was nationally distributed to a convenience sample of parents of young athletes between the ages of 5 and 18. The survey focused on questions relating to demographic information, history of ACL injury, knowledge of ACL injury prevention programs, and factors influencing program awareness. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize participant characteristics and determine prevalence of program awareness. Results: A total of 244 parents completed the survey with 74% indicating their child’s primary sport was soccer. Seventy-seven percent of these athletes began specializing in their primary sport at an average age of 8 years old (SD = 2.72). Only 18% of parents reported knowledge of ACL injury prevention programs and just 6% reported their child has ever participated in one. Of the 29 (12%) athletes who had experienced an ACL injury, only 17% had ever participated in an ACL injury prevention program. The most common reported barrier of ACL injury prevention program participation was the lack of awareness of where to get such training and it not being readily offered to their child. Sixty-eight percent of all parents would have their child participate in an ACL injury prevention program if offered to them. Conclusion: There is a lack of awareness of ACL injury prevention programs among parents of young athletes involved in high injury-risk sports. However, most parents would be interested in their child utilizing an ACL injury prevention program if it were offered.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».