MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk Factors for Injury in Child and Adolescent Sport: A Systematic Review of the Literature

2003· review· en· W2010548800 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGeneralizability theoryPsychosocialPopulationInjury preventionPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsExternal validityInternal validitySystematic reviewClinical psychologyMEDLINEPhysical therapyEnvironmental healthPsychiatryPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review of the literature is to identify risk factors and potential prevention strategies that may modify risk factors for injury in child and adolescent sport. DATA SOURCES: Seven electronic databases were searched to identify potentially relevant articles. A combination of Medical Subject Headings and text words were used (athletic injuries, sports injury, risk factors, adolescent, and child). STUDY SELECTION: This review is based on epidemiological evidence in which the data are original, an exposure and outcome are objectively measured, and an attempt is made to create a comparison group. Forty-five studies were selected for this review. DATA EXTRACTION: The data summarized include study design, study population, exposures, outcomes, and results. Estimates of odds ratios or relative risks were calculated where study data were adequate to do so. The quality of evidence is based on internal validity, external validity, and causal association. DATA SYNTHESIS: There is some evidence that potentially modifiable risk factors including poor endurance, lack of preseason training, and some psychosocial factors are important risk factors for injury in child and adolescent sport. Concerns with study design, internal validity, and generalizability persist. The evidence is consistent, however, with more convincing evidence from adult population studies. The evidence for nonmodifiable risk factors for injury in adolescent sport (ie, age, sex, previous injury) is consistent among studies. CONCLUSIONS: Sport participation and injury rates in child and adolescent sport are high. This review will assist in targeting the relevant groups and designing future research examining risk factors and prevention strategies in child and adolescent sport. Future clinical trials addressing modifiable risk factors to reduce the incidence of sports injury in this population are necessary.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.375 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it