↓ Skip to main content

Dose-Response Relationship of Neuromuscular Training for Injury Prevention in Youth Athletes: A Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, November 2017
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 (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
310 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
263 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.
Title
Dose-Response Relationship of Neuromuscular Training for Injury Prevention in Youth Athletes: A Meta-Analysis
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00920
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Steib, Anna L. Rahlf, Klaus Pfeifer, Astrid Zech

Abstract

Background: Youth athletes with intensive sports participation are at an increased risk of sustaining injuries. Neuromuscular training programs reduce sports-related injury risk in this population, however, the dose-response relationship is largely unknown. Thus, the aim of this meta-analysis was to identify the optimal frequency, volume, duration, and period of neuromuscular training to prevent injuries in youth athletes. Methods: Computerized database searches (PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, The Cochrane Library, PEDro) were conducted in January 2017, with search terms related to youth sports, neuromuscular training, and injury prevention. Eligible trials (i) evaluated a neuromuscular training program; (ii) included youth athletes of 21 years or younger; (iii) had an analytical design (RCTs, quasi-experimental, cohort studies); (iv) contained original data; (v) and provided injury data. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality of eligible studies. Injury rate ratios (IRRs) for lower extremity injuries were pooled meta-analytically, and moderator analyses examined the effect of training frequency, duration, volume, and period. Results: Data from 16 trials yielded an overall risk reduction of 42% with neuromuscular training (IRR = 0.58, 95%CI 0.47-0.72). Training frequencies of two (IRR = 0.50; 95%CI 0.29-0.86) or three times (IRR = 0.40; 95%CI 0.31-0.53) per week revealed the largest risk reduction, and a weekly training volume of more than 30 min tended to be more effective compared to lower volumes. Programs with 10-15 min (IRR = 0.55; 95%CI 0.42-0.72) session duration produced effects comparable to those with longer session duration (IRR = 0.60; 95%CI 0.46-0.76). Interventions lasting more than 6 months were not superior to shorter programs. Conclusion: This meta-analysis revealed that NMT performed in short bouts of 10-15 min, two to three times per week, with a weekly training volume of 30-60 min had the largest preventive effect for lower extremity injuries in youth athletes. These effects can be achieved within 20-60 sessions and training periods of <6 months. The present results are derived from a relatively small number of studies with heterogeneous methodological quality and should be treated with caution. The study was a priori registered at PROSPERO (CRD42016053473).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 310 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 263 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 263 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 42 16%
Student > Bachelor 31 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 8%
Researcher 18 7%
Other 17 6%
Other 61 23%
Unknown 74 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 91 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Unspecified 5 2%
Other 14 5%
Unknown 86 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 213. 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 July 2022.
All research outputs
#183,430
of 25,501,527 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#100
of 15,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,700
of 336,442 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#8
of 332 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,501,527 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 15,677 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. 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 336,442 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 332 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 97% of its contemporaries.