↓ Skip to main content

Periodic Health Examination and Injury Prediction in Professional Football (Soccer): Theoretically, the Prognosis is Good

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
186 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
Title
Periodic Health Examination and Injury Prediction in Professional Football (Soccer): Theoretically, the Prognosis is Good
Published in
Sports Medicine, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s40279-018-0928-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tom Hughes, Jamie C. Sergeant, Danielle A. van der Windt, Richard Riley, Michael J. Callaghan

Abstract

In professional soccer and other elite sports, medical and performance screening of athletes (also termed periodic health examination or PHE) is common practice. The purposes of this are: (1) to assist in identifying prevalent conditions that may be a threat to safe participation, (2) to assist in setting benchmark targets for rehabilitation or performance purposes and (3) to assist clinicians in determining which athletes may be at risk of future injury and selecting appropriate injury prevention strategies to reduce the perceived risk. However, when using PHE as an injury prevention tool, are clinicians seeking to identify potential causes of injury or to predict future injury? This Current Opinion aims to examine the conceptual differences between aetiology and prediction of injury while relating these areas to the capabilities of PHE in practice. We also introduce the concept of prognosis-a broader approach that is closely related to prediction-and why this may have greater applicability to PHE of professional athletes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 186 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 %
Unknown 145 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Researcher 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 3%
Other 21 14%
Unknown 51 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 38 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 55 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 122. 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 04 February 2021.
All research outputs
#345,163
of 25,639,676 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#339
of 2,892 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,758
of 340,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#7
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,639,676 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,892 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 340,343 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.