MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762374931 · doi:10.1177/1941738117734164

Limited Evidence Suggests a Protective Association Between Oral Contraceptive Pill Use and Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries in Females: A Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2762374931 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 Health A Multidisciplinary Approach · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBrown University
KeywordsMedicineAnterior cruciate ligamentACL injuryContext (archaeology)PillCINAHLObservational studyMenstrual cyclePopulationOral contraceptive pillPhysical therapyGynecologyFamily planningSurgeryInternal medicinePsychological interventionEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Female athletes aged 14 to 18 years are at particular risk for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries. Hormonal factors are thought to predispose them to this injury. Oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) might reduce ACL injury risk, although the literature appears controversial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between OCP use and ACL injuries in women. The secondary objective was to determine the rates of ACL injuries in the pre- and postovulatory phases of the menstrual cycle in OCP and non-OCP (NOCP) users. DATA SOURCES: Searches were performed across 4 reference databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane), abstracts from 6 specialty societies, ClinicalTrials.gov , and reference lists of relevant papers. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies investigating the association between OCP use and ACL injuries in females of any age or the distribution of ACL injuries across the menstrual cycle in OCP and NOCP users. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. DATA EXTRACTION: Data regarding study design, population characteristics, OCP details, outcome definitions, analytic methods, and results were extracted from the included studies. The methodological quality of each study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: The search yielded 1305 citations, of which 7 retrospective observational studies met the inclusion criteria. Two large case-control studies with higher methodological quality suggested that OCP use may reduce the risk of sustaining an ACL injury. Five comparative studies examining injury distribution across the menstrual cycle in OCP and NOCP users had conflicting findings, were heterogeneous, and were limited by low methodological quality. CONCLUSION: The evidence suggests OCP use may reduce the risk of ACL injury; however, no conclusions can be drawn regarding differences in risk of ACL injuries between OCP and NOCP users across the menstrual cycle. Studies were limited by small sample sizes, heterogeneity, and methodological concerns.

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)0.006
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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.275 · 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