MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2615140352 · doi:10.1186/s40798-017-0087-y

Biomedical Risk Factors of Achilles Tendinopathy in Physically Active People: a Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2615140352 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSports Medicine - Open · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTendon Structure and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTendinopathyAchilles tendonMedicinePhysical therapyCochrane LibrarySystematic reviewBioinformaticsTendonPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMEDLINEMeta-analysisInternal medicinePathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Achilles tendinopathy is the most prevalent tendon disorder in people engaged in running and jumping sports. Aetiology of Achilles tendinopathy is complex and requires comprehensive research of contributing risk factors. There is relatively little research focussing on potential biomedical risk factors for Achilles tendinopathy. The purpose of this systematic review is to identify studies and summarise current knowledge of biomedical risk factors of Achilles tendinopathy in physically active people. METHODS: Research databases were searched for relevant articles followed by assessment in accordance with PRISMA statement and standards of Cochrane collaboration. Levels of evidence and quality assessment designation were implemented in accordance with OCEBM levels of evidence and Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale, respectively. RESULTS: A systematic review of the literature identified 22 suitable articles. All included studies had moderate level of evidence (2b) with the Newcastle-Ottawa score varying between 6 and 9. The majority (17) investigated genetic polymorphisms involved in tendon structure and homeostasis and apoptosis and inflammation pathways. Overweight as a risk factor of Achilles tendinopathy was described in five included studies that investigated non-genetic factors. COL5A1 genetic variants were the most extensively studied, particularly in association with genetic variants in the genes involved in regulation of cell-matrix interaction in tendon and matrix homeostasis. It is important to investigate connections and pathways whose interactions might be disrupted and therefore alter collagen structure and lead to the development of pathology. Polymorphisms in genes involved in apoptosis and inflammation, and Achilles tendinopathy did not show strong association and, however, should be considered for further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that biomedical risk factors are an important consideration in the future study of propensity to the development of Achilles tendinopathy. The presence of certain medical comorbidities and genetic markers should be considered when contemplating the aetiology of Achilles tendinopathy. Further elucidation of biomedical risk factors will aid in the understanding of tendon pathology and patient risk, thereby informing prevention and management strategies for Achilles tendinopathy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016036558.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.354 · 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