Prevention of Overhead Shoulder Injuries in Throwing Athletes: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: Shoulder pathologies are mostly found in overhead sports. Many risk factors have been identified, in particular a deficit in the kinetic chain. The aim of this review was to find out whether prevention by strengthening the kinetic chain can have an impact on the rate of shoulder injury in overhead pitching athletes. (2) Methods: A systematic review of the literature was carried out, including studies on the role of the kinetic chain in the prevention of overhead athletes. The studies used were works published over the last 10 years searched on PubMed, Cochrane Library, PEDro and Science Direct. They were also analyzed by methodological quality scales: the PEDro scale and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. (3) Results: Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The studies analyzed revealed a significant correlation between the use of the kinetic chain and the prevention of shoulder injuries, associating factors such as muscle strength, physical performance in tests (CMJ, FMS), static and dynamic balance and the ability to transfer energy from the lower to the upper body. (4) Conclusions: It is important to integrate core stability work and lower limb strengthening to minimize excessive stress on the shoulder complex, while optimizing force production and performance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".