MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Preventive effect of exercise interventions on sport-related concussion: a systematic review

2025· article· zh· W7162877953 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
DUAN Fuwen, ZHANG Beiqi, LI Li

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagezh
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionCochrane LibraryIsometric exerciseSystematic reviewMEDLINEResistance trainingIntervention (counseling)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To conduct a systematic review of the preventive effect of exercise interventions on sport-related concussions (SRC). Methods Literatures about the preventive effect of exercise interventions on SRC were searched in databases including CNKI, Wanfang data, VIP, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EBSCO, with the search scope covering from the establishment of the databases to July 22, 2025. The methodological quality of the in-cluded studies was assessed using PEDro Scale, and relevant data were extracted following the PRISMA guide-lines for a systematic review. Results A total of 29 studies were included. Among them, studies with individuals as the analytical unit included 3 892 participants; studies with teams as the analytical unit involved 41 clubs. Participants came from countries including the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and Germany. The studies spanned from 2004 to 2025. The scores of PEDro scale was four to eight. Intervention methods comprised traditional neck resistance training, dynamic neck resistance training and injury prevention programs. Traditional neck resistance training (primarily using bodyweight or elastic bands, often involving isometric contractions) typically featured 15 to 35 minutes per session, two to three times per week, for four to 16 weeks. Dynamic neck resistance training (involving multi-plane isometric or isokinetic exercises using specialized equipment) typically featured ten to 40 minutes per session, two to three sessions per week, for six to 14 weeks. Injury prevention programs (incorporating neck exercises before/after routine training, integrating neuromuscular control, balance training, perturbation training and technique optimization) typically featured 15 to 20 minutes per session, two to three sessions per week, for three to nine months in the season. Neck strength gains were most robust across all three intervention types, with dynamic training yielding greater multidirectional strength gains compared to traditional training. Some studies also observed improvements in key head kinematic parameters through exercise interventions, particularly for individuals using injury prevention programs and those with baseline weak neck strength. A small number of randomized controlled trials confirmed that injury prevention programs reduced SRC incidence, demonstrating a dose-response relationship where greater benefits correlated with higher adherence. Conclusion Most studies confirm that exercise interventions are effective on preventing SRC, though some individual studies remain controversial. Standardized, sustained and well-adhered-to exercise interventions can reduce SRC risk, which should be promoted as a primary prevention strategy at the team level.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.010
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.239
GPT teacher head0.605
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→