↓ Skip to main content

Injuries in Field Hockey Players: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
21 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
273 Mendeley
Title
Injuries in Field Hockey Players: A Systematic Review
Published in
Sports Medicine, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40279-017-0839-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Saulo Delfino Barboza, Corey Joseph, Joske Nauta, Willem van Mechelen, Evert Verhagen

Abstract

To commence injury prevention efforts, it is necessary to understand the magnitude of the injury problem. No systematic reviews have yet investigated the extent of injuries in field hockey, despite the popularity of the sport worldwide. Our objective was to describe the rate and severity of injuries in field hockey and investigate their characteristics. We conducted electronic searches in PubMed, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and CINAHL. Prospective cohort studies were included if they were published in English in a peer-reviewed journal and observed all possible injuries sustained by field hockey players during the period of the study. The risk of bias score of the 22 studies included ranged from three to nine of a possible ten. In total, 12 studies (55%) reported injuries normalized by field hockey exposure. Injury rates ranged from 0.1 injuries (in school-aged players) to 90.9 injuries (in Africa Cup of Nations) per 1000 player-hours and from one injury (in high-school women) to 70 injuries (in under-21 age women) per 1000 player-sessions. Studies used different classifications for injury severity, but-within studies-injuries were included mostly in the less severe category. The lower limbs were most affected, and contusions/hematomas and abrasions were common types of injury. Contact injuries are common, but non-contact injuries are also a cause for concern. Considerable heterogeneity meant it was not possible to draw conclusive findings on the extent of the rate and severity of injuries. Establishing the extent of sports injury is considered the first step towards prevention, so there is a need for a consensus on injury surveillance in field hockey.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 273 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 273 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 59 22%
Student > Master 36 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 7%
Researcher 14 5%
Student > Postgraduate 13 5%
Other 23 8%
Unknown 109 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 68 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 39 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 9%
Social Sciences 4 1%
Psychology 4 1%
Other 18 7%
Unknown 115 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 03 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,551,800
of 25,151,710 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,210
of 2,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,278
of 455,144 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#30
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,151,710 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,895 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
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 455,144 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.