↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#15 of 6,859)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
15 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
439 X users
facebook
19 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator
podcasts
2 podcasts

Readers on

mendeley
867 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Evidence-Based Best-Practice Guidelines for Preventing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries in Young Female Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Published in
The American Journal of Sports Medicine, July 2018
DOI 10.1177/0363546518782460
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Injury prevention neuromuscular training (NMT) programs reduce the risk for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. However, variation in program characteristics limits the potential to delineate the most effective practices to optimize injury risk reduction. To evaluate the common and effective components included in ACL NMT programs and develop an efficient, user-friendly tool to assess the quality of ACL NMT programs. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Study inclusion required (1) a prospective controlled trial study design, (2) an NMT intervention aimed to reduce incidence of ACL injury, (3) a comparison group, (4) ACL injury incidence, and (5) female participants. The following data were extracted: year of publication, study design, sample size and characteristics, and NMT characteristics including exercise type and number per session, volume, duration, training time, and implementer training. Analysis entailed both univariate subgroup and meta-regression techniques using random-effects models. Eighteen studies were included in the meta-analyses, with a total of 27,231 participants, 347 sustaining an ACL injury. NMT reduced the risk for ACL injury from 1 in 54 to 1 in 111 (odds ratio [OR], 0.51; 95% CI, 0.37-0.69]). The overall mean training volume was 18.17 hours for the entire NMT (24.1 minutes per session, 2.51 times per week). Interventions targeting middle school or high school-aged athletes reduced injury risk (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.24-0.60) to a greater degree than did interventions for college- or professional-aged athletes (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.89). All interventions included some form of implementer training. Increased landing stabilization and lower body strength exercises during each session improved prophylactic benefits. A meta-regression model and simple checklist based on the aforementioned effective components (slope = -0.15, P = .0008; intercept = 0.04, P = .51) were developed to allow practitioners to evaluate the potential efficacy of their ACL NMT and optimize injury prevention effects. Considering the aggregated evidence, we recommend that ACL NMT programs target younger athletes and use trained implementers who incorporate lower body strength exercises (ie, Nordic hamstrings, lunges, and heel-calf raises) with a specific focus on landing stabilization (jump/hop and hold) throughout their sport seasons. Clinicians, coaches, athletes, parents, and practitioners can use the developed checklist to gain insight into the quality of their current ACL NMT practices and can use the tool to optimize programming for future ACL NMT to reduce ACL injury risk.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 439 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 867 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 867 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 117 13%
Student > Master 94 11%
Researcher 51 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 46 5%
Other 42 5%
Other 118 14%
Unknown 399 46%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 137 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 119 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 117 13%
Social Sciences 12 1%
Unspecified 11 1%
Other 52 6%
Unknown 419 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 454. 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 25 August 2026.
All research outputs
#77,892
of 34,652,893 outputs
Outputs from The American Journal of Sports Medicine
#15
of 6,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,314
of 371,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Journal of Sports Medicine
#1
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,652,893 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 6,859 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 371,668 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 73 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 98% of its contemporaries.