Barriers and facilitators to implementation of musculoskeletal injury mitigation programmes for military service members around the world: a scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal injury (MSK-I) mitigation and prevention programmes (MSK-IMPPs) have been developed and implemented across militaries worldwide. Although programme efficacy is often reported, development and implementation details are often overlooked, limiting their scalability, sustainability and effectiveness. This scoping review aimed to identify the following in military populations: (1) barriers and facilitators to implementing and scaling MSK-IMPPs; (2) gaps in MSK-IMPP research and (3) future research priorities. METHODS: A scoping review assessed literature from inception to April 2022 that included studies on MSK-IMPP implementation and/or effectiveness in military populations. Barriers and facilitators to implementing these programmes were identified. RESULTS: From 132 articles, most were primary research studies (90; 68.2%); the remainder were review papers (42; 31.8%). Among primary studies, 3 (3.3%) investigated only women, 62 (69%) only men and 25 (27.8%) both. Barriers included limited resources, lack of stakeholder engagement, competing military priorities and equipment-related factors. Facilitators included strong stakeholder engagement, targeted programme design, involvement/proximity of MSK-I experts, providing MSK-I mitigation education, low burden on resources and emphasising end-user acceptability. Research gaps included variability in reported MSK-I outcomes and no consensus on relevant surveillance metrics and definitions. CONCLUSION: Despite a robust body of literature, there is a dearth of information about programme implementation; specifically, barriers or facilitators to success. Additionally, variability in outcomes and lack of consensus on MSK-I definitions may affect the development, implementation evaluation and comparison of MSK-IMPPs. There is a need for international consensus on definitions and optimal data reporting elements when conducting injury risk mitigation research in the military.
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 | 0.034 | 0.124 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".