↓ Skip to main content

Football injuries during European Championships 2004–2005

Overview of attention for article published in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, March 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Football injuries during European Championships 2004–2005
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, March 2007
DOI 10.1007/s00167-007-0290-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Markus Waldén, Martin Hägglund, Jan Ekstrand

Abstract

The risk of injury in football is high, but few studies have compared men's and women's football injuries. The purpose of this prospective study was to analyse the exposure and injury characteristics of European Championships in football and to compare data for men, women and male youth players. The national teams of all 32 countries (672 players) that qualified to the men's European Championship 2004, the women's European Championship 2005 and the men's Under-19 European Championship 2005 were studied. Individual training and match exposure was documented during the tournaments as well as time loss injuries. The overall injury incidence was 14 times higher during match play than during training (34.6 vs. 2.4 injuries per 1000 h, P < 0.0001). There were no differences in match and training injury incidences between the championships. Teams eliminated in the women's championship had a significantly higher match injury incidence compared to teams going to the semi-finals (65.4 vs. 5.0 injuries per 1000 h, P = 0.02). Non-contact mechanisms were ascribed for 41% of the match injuries. One-fifth of all injuries were severe with absence from play longer than 4 weeks. In conclusion, injury incidences during the European Championships studied were very similar and it seems thus that the risk of injury in international football is at least not higher in women than in men. The teams eliminated in the women's championship had a significantly higher match injury incidence than the teams going to the final stage. Finally, the high frequency of non-contact injury is worrying from a prevention perspective and should be addressed in future studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 143 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 15%
Student > Bachelor 20 14%
Researcher 15 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Postgraduate 11 8%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 38 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 42 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 34 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 45 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 June 2018.
All research outputs
#14,196,440
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#1,571
of 2,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,044
of 76,838 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,642 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 76,838 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.