MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003431661 · doi:10.1177/0363546519899359

Are Elite Soccer Teams’ Preseason Training Sessions Associated With Fewer In-Season Injuries? A 15-Year Analysis From the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) Elite Club Injury Study

2020· article· en· W3003431661 on OpenAlexaff
Jan Ekstrand, Armin Sprečo, Johann Windt, Karim M. Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFootballMedicineInjury preventionPhysical therapyPoison controlTeam sportAttendanceEliteOccupational safety and healthAthletesEmergency medicineGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Preseason training develops players’ physical capacities and prepares them for the demands of the competitive season. In rugby, Australian football, and American football, preseason training may protect elite players against in-season injury. However, no study has evaluated this relationship at the team level in elite soccer. Purpose/Hypothesis: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the number of preseason training sessions completed by elite soccer teams was associated with team injury rates and player availability during the competitive season. It was hypothesized that elite soccer teams who participate in more preseason training will sustain fewer injuries during the competitive season. Study Design: Descriptive epidemiology study. Methods: We used the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) injury dataset to analyze 44 teams for up to 15 seasons (total, 244 team-seasons). Separate linear regression models examined the association between the number of team preseason training sessions and 5 in-season injury measures. Injury-related problems per team were quantified by totals of the following: (1) injury burden, (2) severe injury incidence, (3) training attendance, (4) match availability, and (5) injury incidence. Results: Teams averaged 30 preseason training sessions (range, 10-51). A greater number of preseason training sessions was associated with less injury load during the competitive season in 4 out of 5 injury-related measures. Our linear regression models revealed that for every 10 additional preseason training sessions that the team performed, the in-season injury burden was 22 layoff days lower per 1000 hours ( P = .002), the severe injury incidence was 0.18 severe injuries lower per 1000 hours ( P = .015), the training attendance was 1.4 percentage points greater ( P = .014), and the match availability was 1.0 percentage points greater ( P = .042). As model fits were relatively low (adjusted R 2 = 1.3%-3.2%), several factors that contribute to in-season injury outcomes were unaccounted for. Conclusion: Teams that performed a greater number of preseason training sessions had “healthier” in-season periods. Many other factors also contribute to in-season injury rates. Understanding the benefit of preseason training on in-season injury patterns may inform sport teams’ planning and preparation.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207