↓ Skip to main content

Compliance with Sport Injury Prevention Interventions in Randomised Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, February 2016
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 (95th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
72 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
Title
Compliance with Sport Injury Prevention Interventions in Randomised Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review
Published in
Sports Medicine, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40279-016-0470-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miriam van Reijen, Ingrid Vriend, Willem van Mechelen, Caroline F. Finch, Evert A. Verhagen

Abstract

Sport injury prevention studies vary in the way compliance with an intervention is defined, measured and adjusted for. The objective of this systematic review was to assess the extent to which sport injury prevention randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have defined, measured and adjusted results for compliance with an injury prevention intervention. An electronic search was performed in MEDLINE, PubMed, the Cochrane Center of Controlled Trials, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) and SPORTDiscus. English RCTs, quasi-RCTs and cluster-RCTs were considered eligible. Trials that involved physically active individuals or examined the effects of an intervention aimed at the prevention of sport- or physical activity-related injuries were included. Of the total of 100 studies included, 71.6 % mentioned compliance or a related term, 68.8 % provided details on compliance measurement and 51.4 % provided compliance data. Only 19.3 % analysed the effect of compliance rates on study outcomes. While studies used heterogeneous methods, pooled effects could not be presented. Studies that account for compliance demonstrated that compliance significant affects study outcomes. The way compliance is dealt with in preventions studies is subject to a large degree of heterogeneity. Valid and reliable tools to measure and report compliance are needed and should be matched to a uniform definition of compliance.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 72 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 103 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Student > Master 17 16%
Unspecified 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Other 30 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 32%
Sports and Recreations 30 28%
Unspecified 19 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 11 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 November 2018.
All research outputs
#414,556
of 13,387,275 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#447
of 2,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,241
of 337,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#12
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,387,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 337,852 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.