| Title |
Safety in Mixed Martial Arts: a 7-Year Review of Cancelled MMA Bouts in Calgary, Alberta, During the Pre-bout Medical Examination Period
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sports Medicine - Open, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40798-018-0119-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gwynn Curran-Sills |
| Abstract |
Presently, there is no literature that examines the reasons for the cancellation of amateur or professional mixed martial arts (MMA) bouts. The purpose of this study was to review the circumstances that lead to the cancellation of MMA bouts by Calgary ringside physicians during the pre-bout examination period and to identify any emerging patterns that may guide the regulatoin of this sport. The case-series was constructed from the Calgary Combative Sports Commission pre-bout examination records and the medical records submitted by each athlete from January 2010 to December 2016. Cancelled bouts in the pre-bout examination periods represented 5.4% of all MMA bouts in Calgary. A total of 25 reasons lead to bout cancellation and included the following: failure to obtain required neuroimaging (28.0%), neuroimaging abnormalities (24.0%), incomplete routine screening investigations (16.0%), exceeding maximum weight differential between the two athletes (16.0%), injury in the pre-competition period (8.0%), dehydration (4.0%), and ECG abnormalities (4.0%). The abnormalities on neuroimaging (n of 6) included the following: post traumatic gliosis on MRI (n = 1, 16.7%), flares diffusely and findings consistent with microhemorrhage on MRI (n = 1, 16.7%), chronic orbital fracture with fat pad extrusion on CT (n = 2, 33.3%), lacunar infarct on MRI (1), and unspecified MRI abnormality (n = 1, 16.7%). Twenty-two athletes had bouts cancelled and of these three athletes had their bouts stopped for two reasons. The following recommendations are presented and include: the creation of guidelines regarding pre- and post-bout neuroimaging, the implementation of industry-wide minimum medical screening standards, the adoption of a longitudinal approach to weight monitoring, the development of competent ringside physician groups, and active oversight by the Combative Sports Commission during the matchmaking process. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 52 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 17% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 22 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 11 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 24 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 16 January 2018.
All research outputs
#5,807,468
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine - Open
#300
of 477 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,026
of 443,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine - Open
#10
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 477 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 443,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.