| Title |
Incidence of Running-Related Injuries Per 1000 h of running in Different Types of Runners: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sports Medicine, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40279-015-0333-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Solvej Videbæk, Andreas Moeballe Bueno, Rasmus Oestergaard Nielsen, Sten Rasmussen |
| Abstract |
No systematic review has identified the incidence of running-related injuries per 1000 h of running in different types of runners. The purpose of the present review was to systematically search the literature for the incidence of running-related injuries per 1000 h of running in different types of runners, and to include the data in meta-analyses. A search of the PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, PEDro and Web of Science databases was conducted. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened by two blinded reviewers to identify prospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials reporting the incidence of running-related injuries in novice runners, recreational runners, ultra-marathon runners, and track and field athletes. Data were extracted from all studies and comprised for further analysis. An adapted scale was applied to assess the risk of bias. After screening 815 abstracts, 13 original articles were included in the main analysis. Running-related injuries per 1000 h of running ranged from a minimum of 2.5 in a study of long-distance track and field athletes to a maximum of 33.0 in a study of novice runners. The meta-analyses revealed a weighted injury incidence of 17.8 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 16.7-19.1) in novice runners and 7.7 (95 % CI 6.9-8.7) in recreational runners. Heterogeneity in definitions of injury, definition of type of runner, and outcome measures in the included full-text articles challenged comparison across studies. Novice runners seem to face a significantly greater risk of injury per 1000 h of running than recreational runners. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 106 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 18 | 17% |
| United States | 13 | 12% |
| Canada | 6 | 6% |
| Ireland | 3 | 3% |
| Spain | 3 | 3% |
| Brazil | 2 | 2% |
| Finland | 2 | 2% |
| Sweden | 2 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 44 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 74 | 70% |
| Scientists | 20 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 8% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 918 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 908 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 169 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 160 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 76 | 8% |
| Researcher | 53 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 51 | 6% |
| Other | 147 | 16% |
| Unknown | 262 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 227 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 138 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 127 | 14% |
| Engineering | 31 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 3% |
| Other | 67 | 7% |
| Unknown | 305 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 246. 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 07 March 2024.
All research outputs
#154,062
of 25,726,194 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#140
of 2,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,537
of 279,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#2
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,726,194 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,894 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 57.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 279,929 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.