MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386530203 · doi:10.1177/19417381231195529

Outcomes of Activity-Related Lower Extremity Muscle Tears After Application of the British Athletics Muscle Injury Classification: A Systematic Review

2023· review· en· W4386530203 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 · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)Physical therapyCochrane LibraryGrading (engineering)Data extractionProspective cohort studyCohortEvidence-based medicineAthletesSystematic reviewMEDLINECohort studyClinical significancePhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineMeta-analysisPathologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Muscle injury classification and grading systems have been reported for >100 years; yet it offer limited evidence relating the clinical or radiological qualities of a muscle injury to the pathology or clinical outcome. The British Athletics Muscle Injury Classification (BAMIC) incorporates recent predictive features of muscle injuries and provides a precise radiographic framework for clinical prediction and management. OBJECTIVE: To investigate clinical outcomes, particularly time to return to play (RTP), reinjury rate (RIR), and prognostic value of specific magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings, of activity-related muscle injuries (tears) in athletes after application of the BAMIC. DATA SOURCES: A search of PubMed (NLM), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science (Clarivate), Cochrane Library (Wiley), and ClinicalTrials.gov from the inception date of each database through August 31, 2022, was conducted. Keywords included the BAMIC. STUDY SELECTION: All English language studies evaluating clinical outcomes of RTP and RIR after activity-related muscle injuries and where BAMIC was applied were included. A total of 136 articles were identified, and 11 studies met inclusion criteria. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42022353801). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility and extracted data. Methodological quality of included study was assessed independently by 2 reviewers with the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Scale (NOS); 11 good quality studies (4 prospective cohort studies, 7 retrospective cohort studies) with 468 athletes (57 female) and 574 muscle injuries were included. RESULTS: All studies reported a statistically significant relationship between BAMIC grade, BAMIC injury site, and/or combined BAMIC grade and injury site with RTP. A statistically significant increased RIR was reported by BAMIC grade and BAMIC injury site in 2 of 4 and 3 of 4 studies, respectively. The prognostic value of individual MRI criteria was limited. CONCLUSION: Consistent evidence suggests that BAMIC offers prognostic and therapeutic guidance for clinical outcomes, particularly RTP and RIR, after activity-related muscle injuries in athletes that may be superior to previous muscle injury classification and grading systems.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.323 · 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