Postural stability deficit could predict ankle sprains: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To perform a systematic review aimed to determine (1) if the postural stability deficit represents a risk factor for ankle sprains; (2) the most effective postural stability evaluation to predict ankle sprains and (3) eventual confounding factors that could influence postural stability and ankle sprain risk. METHODS: A systematic electronic search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL using the search terms (balance) OR (postural stability) matched with (lower limb) OR (ankle) OR (foot) and (sprain) OR (injury) on October 2 2017. All prospective studies that evaluated postural stability as risk factor for ankle sprains were included. The PRISMA Checklist guided the reporting and data abstraction. Methodological quality of all included papers was carefully assessed. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included, evaluating 2860 individuals. Various assessment tools or instruments were used to assess postural stability. The injury incidence ranged from 10 to 34%. Postural stability deficit was recognized as risk factor for ankle sprain (OR = 1.22-10.2) in 9 cases [3 out of 3 with Star Excursion Balance Test (SEBT)]. Among the six studies that measured the center-of-gravity sway, five were able to detect worse postural stability in athletes that sustained an ankle sprain. In nine cases, the measurement of postural stability did not show any statistical relationship with ankle sprains (four out of five with examiner evaluation). In the studies that excluded patients with history of ankle sprain, postural stability was reported to be a significant risk factor in five out of six studies. CONCLUSIONS: The ultimate role of postural stability as risk factor for ankle sprains was not defined, due to the high heterogeneity of results, patient's populations, sports and methods of postural stability evaluation. Regarding assessment instruments, measurement of center-of-gravity sway could detect athletes at risk, however, standardized tools and protocols are needed to confirm this finding. The SEBT could be considered a promising tool that needs further investigation in wider samples. History of ankle sprains is an important confounding factor, since it was itself a source of postural stability impairment and a risk factor for ankle sprains. These information could guide clinicians in developing screening programs and design further prospective cohort studies comparing different evaluation tools. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I (systematic review of prospective prognostic studies).
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".