liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Meta-narrative analysis of sports injury reporting practices based on the Injury Definitions Concept Framework (IDCF): A review of consensus statements and epidemiological studies in athletics (track and field)
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Community Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Health and Developmental Care, Center for Public Health.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6049-5402
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Community Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Community Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Health and Developmental Care, Center for Public Health.
Federat University of Australia, Australia.
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, ISSN 1440-2440, E-ISSN 1878-1861, Vol. 18, no 6, 643-650 p.Article, review/survey (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objectives: Consistency in routines for reporting injury has been a focus of development efforts in sports epidemiology for a long time. To gain an improved understanding of current reporting practices, we applied the Injury Definitions Concept Framework (IDCF) in a review of injury reporting in a subset of the field. Design: Meta-narrative review. Methods: An analysis of injury definitions reported in consensus statements for different sports and studies of injury epidemiology in athletics (track and field) published in PubMed between 1980 and 2013 was performed. Separate narratives for each of the three reporting contexts in the IDCF were constructed from the data. Results: Six consensus statements and 14 studies reporting on athletics injury epidemiology fulfilled the selection criteria. The narratives on sports performance, clinical examination, and athlete self-report contexts were evenly represented in the eligible studies. The sports performance and athlete self-report narratives covered both professional and community athletes as well as training and competition settings. In the clinical examination narrative, data collection by health service professionals was linked to studies of professional athletes at international championships. Conclusions: From an application of the IDCF in a review of injury reporting in sports epidemiology we observed a parallel usage of reporting contexts in this field of research. The co-existence of reporting methodologies does not necessarily reflect a problematic situation, but only provided that firm precautions are taken when comparing studies performed in the different contexts. (C) 2014 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
ELSEVIER SCI LTD , 2015. Vol. 18, no 6, 643-650 p.
Keyword [en]
Sports epidemiology; Terminology; Sports injury; Overuse injuries; Qualitative methods
National Category
Basic Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-122652DOI: 10.1016/j.jsams.2014.11.393ISI: 000363599000005PubMedID: 25620458OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-122652DiVA: diva2:871738
Available from: 2015-11-16 Created: 2015-11-13 Last updated: 2016-04-24

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Timpka, ToomasJacobsson, JennyEkberg, Joakim
By organisation
Division of Community MedicineFaculty of Medicine and Health SciencesCenter for Public HealthDepartment of Medical and Health Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Basic Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 189 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link