Search

Objectives: Most first-time biomedical research grant applications are not funded. In the challenging research funding climate, resubmitting a grant application is a necessary task for scientists. Identifying which factors influence their decision to resubmit and the success of resubmissions will inform funders and applicants. However, data on resubmissions are fragmented and under-reported. In this scoping review, we aimed to summarise (1) the outcomes of resubmitting biomedical research grant applications and (2) the demographic characteristics of scientists who resubmitted grant applications., Design: Scoping review with reporting informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses., Data Sources: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Registrar of Controlled Trials CENTRAL, PsycINFO, Web of Science and grey literature sources were searched through November 2022., Eligibility Criteria: We included peer-reviewed and grey literature records from the biomedical sciences that reported outcomes of the resubmission process (eg, resubmission success rate, rate of resubmission) and information about the scientists who resubmit grant applications (eg, sex, race, career stage)., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The data were cross-referenced and any conflicts were resolved via consensus. Data were summarised descriptively and presented in tables and figures., Results: Resubmissions represented a substantial proportion of applications (lowest prevalence rate: 4%; highest prevalence rate: 56%) in a given funding cycle and were reliably more successful than first-time applications (lowest success rate: 16%; highest success rate: 82%)-a phenomenon associated with several sociodemographic, institutional and project-related factors. There was conflicting evidence about the relationship of sociodemographic-related, institution-related and project-related factors to resubmission likelihood and success., Conclusion: The resubmission process is a time-consuming and often frustrating experience for researchers. Our review identified opportunities to streamline and improve the process to enhance the biomedical research landscape., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Competing Interests: Each author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.

Making return-to-sport decisions can be complex and multi-faceted, as it requires an evaluation of an individual's physical, psychological, and social well-being. Specifically, the timing of progression, regression, or return to sport can be difficult to determine due to the multitude of information that needs to be considered by clinicians. With the advent of new sports technology, the increasing volume of data poses a challenge to clinicians in effectively processing and utilising it to enhance the quality of their decisions. To gain a deeper understanding of the mechanisms underlying human decision making and associated biases, this narrative review provides a brief overview of different decision-making models that are relevant to sports rehabilitation settings. Accordingly, decisions can be made intuitively, analytically, and/or with heuristics. This narrative review demonstrates how the decision-making models can be applied in the context of return-to-sport decisions and shed light on strategies that may help clinicians improve decision quality., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

BACKGROUND: The Lancet Low Back Pain (LBP) Series highlighted the lack of LBP data from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The study aimed to describe (1) what LBP care is currently delivered in LMICs and (2) how that care is delivered. DESIGN: An online mixed-methods study. METHODS: A Consortium for LBP in LMICs (n = 65) was developed with an expert panel of leading LBP researchers (>2 publications on LBP) and multidisciplinary clinicians and patient partners with 5 years of clinical/lived LBP experience in LMICs. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Two researchers independently analyzed qualitative data using inductive and deductive coding and developed a thematic framework. RESULTS: Forty-seven (85%) of 55 invited panel members representing 32 LMICs completed the survey (38% women, 62% men). The panel included clinicians (34%), researchers (28%), educators (6%), and people with lived experience (4%). Pharmacotherapies and electrophysiological agents were the most used LBP treatments. The thematic framework comprised 8 themes: (1) self-management is ubiquitous, (2) medicines are the cornerstone, (3) traditional therapies have a place, (4) society plays an important role, (5) imaging use is very common, (6) reliance on passive approaches, (7) social determinants influence LBP care pathway, and (8) health systems are ill-prepared to address LBP burden. CONCLUSION: LBP care in LMICs did not consistently align with the best available evidence. Findings will help research prioritization in LMICs and guide global LBP clinical guidelines. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(8):560-572. Epub 11 April 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12406 .

Purpose: To explore how the change-point method can be used to analyze complex longitudinal data and detect when meaningful changes (change points) have occurred during rehabilitation., Method: This design is a prospective single-case observational study of a football player in a professional club who sustained an acute lower-limb muscle injury during high-speed running in training. The rehabilitation program was entirely completed in the football club under the supervision of the club's medical team. Four wellness metrics and 5 running-performance metrics were collected before the injury and until the player returned to play., Results: Data were collected over 130 days. In the univariate analysis, the change points for stress, sleep, mood, and soreness were located on days 30, 47, 50, and 50, respectively. The change points for total distance, acceleration, maximum speed, deceleration, and high-speed running were located on days 32, 34, 37, 41, and 41, respectively. The multivariate analysis resulted in a single change point for the wellness metrics and running-performance metrics, on days 50 and 67, respectively., Conclusions: The univariate approach provided information regarding the sequence and time point of the change points. The multivariate approach provided a common change point for multiple metrics, information that would benefit clinicians to have a broad overview of the changes in the rehabilitation process. Clinicians may consider the change-point method to integrate and visualize data from multiple sources to evaluate athletes' progression along the return-to-sport continuum.

Background: Wheelchair tennis, a globally popular sport, features a professional tour spanning 40 countries and over 160 tournaments. Despite its widespread appeal, information about the physical demands of wheelchair tennis is scattered across various studies, necessitating a comprehensive systematic review to synthesise available data., Objective: The aim was to provide a detailed synthesis of the physical demands associated with wheelchair tennis, encompassing diverse factors such as court surfaces, performance levels, sport classes, and sexes., Methods: We conducted comprehensive searches in the PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus databases, covering articles from inception to March 1, 2023. Forward and backward citation tracking from the included articles was carried out using Scopus, and we established eligibility criteria following the Population, Exposure, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design (PECOS) framework. Our study focused on wheelchair tennis players participating at regional, national, or international levels, including both juniors and adults, and open and quad players. We analysed singles and doubles matches and considered sex (male, female), sport class (open, quad), and court surface type (hard, clay, grass) as key comparative points. The outcomes of interest encompassed play duration, on-court movement, stroke performance, and physiological match variables. The selected study designs included observational cross-sectional, longitudinal, and intervention studies (baseline data only). We calculated pooled means or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and employed a random-effects meta-analysis with robust variance estimation. We assessed heterogeneity using Cochrane Q and 95% prediction intervals., Results: Our literature search retrieved 643 records, with 24 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Most available information focused on international male wheelchair tennis players in the open division, primarily competing in singles on hard courts. Key findings (mean [95% CI]) for these players on hard courts were match duration 65.9 min [55.0-78.8], set duration 35.0 min [28.2-43.5], game duration 4.6 min [0.92-23.3], rally duration 6.1 s [3.7-10.2], effective playing time 19.8% [18.9-20.7], and work-to-rest ratio 1:4.1 [1:3.7-1:4.4]. Insufficient data were available to analyse play duration for female players. However, for the available data on hard court matches, the average set duration was 34.8 min [32.5-37.2]. International male players on hard court covered an average distance per match of 3859 m [1917-7768], with mean and peak average forward speeds of 1.06 m/s [0.85-1.32] and 3.55 m/s [2.92-4.31], respectively. These players executed an average of 365.9 [317.2-422.1] strokes per match, 200.6 [134.7-299.0] per set, 25.4 [16.7-38.7] per game, and 3.4 [2.6-4.6] per rally. Insufficient data were available for a meta-analysis of female players' on-court movement and stroke performance. The average and peak heart rates of international male players on hard court were 134.3 [124.2-145.1] and 166.0 [132.7-207.6] beats per minute, and the average match heart rate expressed as a percentage of peak heart rate was 74.7% [46.4-100]. We found no studies concerning regional players or juniors, and only one study on doubles match play., Conclusions: While we present a comprehensive overview of the physical demands of wheelchair tennis, our understanding predominantly centres around international male players competing on hard courts in the open division. To attain a more comprehensive insight into the sport's physical requirements, future research should prioritise the inclusion of data on female and quad players, juniors, doubles, and matches played on clay and grass court surfaces. Such endeavours will facilitate the development of more tailored and effective training programmes for wheelchair tennis players and coaches. The protocol for this systematic review was registered a priori at the International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols (Registration https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2023.3.0060 )., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Objective: Clinicians treating patients with patellofemoral pain (PFP) rely on consensus statements to make the best practice recommendations in the absence of definitive evidence on how to manage PFP. However, the methods used to generate and assess agreement for these recommendations have not been examined. Our objective was to map the methods used to generate consensus-based recommendations for PFP and apply four novel questions to assess the rigour of consensus development., Design: Scoping review., Data Sources: We searched Medline, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and Embase from inception to May 2022 to identify consensus-derived statements or practice guidelines on PFP. The Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis was followed to map the existing evidence. We measured the consensus methods based on four sets of questions addressing the panel composition, application of the consensus method chosen, agreement process and the use of evidence mapping., Eligibility Criteria: All consensus statements or clinical guidelines on PFP were considered., Results: Twenty-two PFP consensus statements were identified. Panel composition: 3 of the 22 (14%) consensus groups reported the panellists' experience, 2 (9%) defined a desired level of expertise, 10 (45%) reported panellist sex and only 2 (9%) included a patient. Consensus method: 7 of 22 (32%) reported using an established method of consensus measurement/development. Agreement process: 10 of 22 (45%) reported their consensus threshold and 2 (9%) acknowledged dissenting opinions among the panel. Evidence mapping: 6 of 22 (27%) reported using systematic methods to identify relevant evidence gaps., Conclusions: PFP consensus panels have lacked diversity and excluded key partners including patients. Consensus statements on PFP frequently fail to use recognised consensus methods, rarely describe how 'agreement' was defined or measured and often neglect to use systematic methods to identify evidence gaps., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

People often use infographics (also called visual or graphical abstracts) as a substitute for reading the full text of an article. This is a concern because most infographics do not present sufficient information to interpret the research appropriately and guide wise health decisions. The Reporting Infographics and Visual Abstracts of Comparative studies (RIVA-C) checklist and guide aims to improve the completeness with which research findings of comparative studies are communicated and avoid research findings being misinterpreted if readers do not refer to the full text. The primary audience for the RIVA-C checklist and guide is developers of infographics that summarise comparative studies of health and medical interventions. The need for the RIVA-C checklist and guide was identified by a survey of how people use infographics. Possible checklist items were informed by a systematic review of how infographics report research. We then conducted a two-round, modified Delphi survey of 92 infographic developers/designers, researchers, health professionals and other key stakeholders. The final checklist includes 10 items. Accompanying explanation and both text and graphical examples linked to the items were developed and pilot tested over a 6-month period. The RIVA-C checklist and guide was designed to facilitate the creation of clear, transparent and sufficiently detailed infographics which summarise comparative studies of health and medical interventions. Accurate infographics can ensure research findings are communicated appropriately and not misinterpreted. By capturing the perspectives of a wide range of end users (eg, authors, informatics editors, journal editors, consumers), we are hopeful of rapid endorsement and implementation of RIVA-C., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

In this paper, we explore what is needed to generate quality research to guide evidence-informed digital health policy and call the Canadian community of patients, clinicians, policy (decision) makers and researchers to action in setting digital health research priorities for supporting underserved communities. Using specific examples, we describe how evidence is produced and implemented to guide digital health policy. We study how research environments must change to reflect and include the communities for whom the policy is intended. Our goal is to guide how future evidence reaches policy makers to help them shape healthcare services and how these services are delivered to underserved communities in Canada. Understanding the pathways through which evidence can make a difference to equitable and sustainable digital health policy is vital for guiding the types of research that attract priority resources., (Copyright © 2024 Longwoods Publishing.)

Learning health systems (LHSs) embed social accountability into everyday workflows and can inform how governments build bridges across the digital health divide. They shape partnerships using rapid cycles of data-driven learning to respond to patients' calls to action for equity from digital health. Adopting the LHS approach involves re-distributing power, which is likely to be met with resistance. We use the LHS example of British Columbia's 811 services to highlight how infrastructure was created to provide care and answer questions about access to digital health, outcomes from it and the financial impact passed on to patients. In the concluding section, we offer an accountability framework that facilitates partnerships in making digital health more equitable., (Copyright © 2024 Longwoods Publishing.)

Background: Eating frequency may affect body weight and cardiometabolic health. Intervention trials and observational studies have both indicated that high- and low-frequency eating can be associated with better health outcomes. There are currently no guidelines to inform how to advise healthy adults about how frequently to consume food or beverages., Aim: To establish whether restricted- (≤ three meals per day) frequency had a superior effect on markers of cardiometabolic health (primary outcome: weight change) compared to unrestricted-eating (≥ four meals per day) frequency in adults., Methods: We searched Medline (Ovid), Embase, CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CAB Direct and Web of Science Core Collection electronic databases from inception to 7 June 2022 for clinical trials (randomised parallel or cross-over trials) reporting on the effect of high or low-frequency eating on cardiometabolic health (primary outcome: weight change). Trial interventions had to last for at least two weeks, and had to have been conducted in human adults. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0. Standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for all outcomes. Certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach., Results: Seventeen reports covering 16 trials were included in the systematic review. Data from five trials were excluded from meta-analysis due to insufficient reporting. 15 of 16 trials were at high risk of bias. There was very low certainty evidence of no difference between high- and low-frequency eating for weight-change (MD: -0.62 kg, CI 95 : -2.76 to 1.52 kg, p = 0.57)., Conclusions: There was no discernible advantage to eating in a high- or low-frequency dietary pattern for cardiometabolic health. We cannot advocate for either restricted- or unrestricted eating frequency to change markers of cardiometabolic health in healthy young to middle-aged adults., Protocol Registration: CRD42019137938., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Perceived confidence is an important dimension of an athlete's psychological readiness to return-to-play. However, there is no established and validated tool to evaluate confidence in professional football. This study aimed to provide preliminary evaluation of the internal structure of the Injury-Psychological Readiness to Return-to-Sport scale (I-PRRS) in a cohort of injured male professional footballers. Over an 18-month period, 29 teams from 17 leagues participated. Players sustaining injuries eliciting ≥ 3 weeks' time-loss were recruited. Cross culturally adapted to 4 further languages, the I-PRRS was administered on two occasions: 1) day before returning-to-training and 2) day before returning-to-match-play. In total, 113 injuries were recorded with 96 completed I-PRRS data sets collected. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated the I-PRRS was a unidimensional scale, with all items measuring the same construct. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency (ω = .88). When examining longitudinal invariance of the I-PRRS across administration time-points, indices of model fit supported scalar invariance. There was preliminary evidence of good internal structure for the I-PRRS in professional male footballers. However, before further research involving the I-PRRS can be endorsed, efforts to confirm or refute empirical developments pertaining to psychological readiness are necessary.

The allocation of public funds for research has been predominantly based on peer review where reviewers are asked to rate an application on some form of ordinal scale from poor to excellent. Poor reliability and bias of peer review rating has led funding agencies to experiment with different approaches to assess applications. In this study, we compared the reliability and potential sources of bias associated with application rating with those of application ranking in 3,156 applications to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Ranking was more reliable than rating and less susceptible to the characteristics of the review panel, such as level of expertise and experience, for both reliability and potential sources of bias. However, both rating and ranking penalized early career investigators and favoured older applicants. Sex bias was only evident for rating and only when the applicant's H-index was at the lower end of the H-index distribution. We conclude that when compared to rating, ranking provides a more reliable assessment of the quality of research applications, is not as influenced by reviewer expertise or experience, and is associated with fewer sources of bias. Research funding agencies should consider adopting ranking methods to improve the quality of funding decisions in health research., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Tamblyn et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Background: Following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR), many athletes do not return to their sport, often driven by concerns about re-injury. Psychological support strategies might help, but are not routinely included in rehabilitation after ACLR. The BAck iN the Game (BANG) intervention is a 24-week eHealth program delivered via smartphone application (app), beginning directly after ACLR, with a self-directed approach that aims to target the specific challenges athletes encounter in rehabilitation., Aim: To describe athletes' experiences of using the BANG app during rehabilitation, to support returning to sport following ACLR., Method: Participants were athletes, in contact and/or non-contact pivoting sports, who had ACLR with the goal to return to sports. Semi-structured, individual interviews were conducted 6-10 months after their ACLR; all had access to the BANG intervention. Verbatim transcripts were analysed with a qualitative content analysis., Results: The 19 participants were 17-30 years, mean 21.6 years (SD 3.5); 7 men and 12 women. The analysis generated three main categories. (A) Interacting with the app illustrated how, when, or why the participants engaged with the app. The app was helpful because of its varying content, the notifications served as reminders and participants stopped using the app when no longer needing it. (B) Challenging experiences with the app illustrated that the app itself came with some difficulties e.g., content not appearing with the right timing and material not tailored to their sport. (C) Supportive experiences with the app reflected how the app facilitated the participants' rehabilitation progress; it included positive aspects of the app content and navigation, boosting their confidence to return to sport, and motivated them to continue with rehabilitation., Conclusion: The analysis of the interviews illustrates athletes' awareness in interacting with, and the challenging and supportive experiences of using the app. The BANG app might provide support for returning to sport, primarily psychological support, as an adjunct to regular physiotherapy-guided rehabilitation. Athletes' experiences of the BANG app could be improved by healthcare professionals providing additional advice about when to use which content and why., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03959215. Registered 22 May 2019., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: The Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the short version of Disabilities of Arms, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) are common patient-reported outcomes for people with elbow problems. Our primary objective was to define thresholds for the Minimal Important Difference (MID) and Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the OES and QuickDASH. The secondary aim was to compare the longitudinal validity of these outcome measures., Methods: We recruited 97 patients with clinically-diagnosed tennis elbow for a prospective observational cohort study in a pragmatic clinical setting. Fifty-five participants received no specific intervention, 14 underwent surgery (11 as primary treatment and 4 during follow-up), and 28 received either botulinum toxin injection or platelet rich plasma injection. We collected OES (0 to 100, higher is better) and QuickDASH (0 to 100, higher is worse), and global rating of change (as an external transition anchor question) at six weeks, three months, six months and 12 months. We defined MID and PASS values using three approaches. To assess the longitudinal validity of the measures, we calculated the Spearman's correlation coefficient between the change in the outcome scores and external transition anchor question, and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) from a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. To assess signal-to-noise ratio, we calculated standardized response means., Results: Depending on the method, MID values ranged from 16 to 21 for OES Pain; 10 to 17 for OES Function; 14 to 28 for OES Social-psychological; 14 to 20 for OES Total score, and - 7 to -9 for QuickDASH. Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) cut offs were 74 to 84 for OES Pain; 88 to 91 for OES Function; 75 to 78 with OES Social-psychological; 80 to 81 with OES Total score and 19 to 23 with Quick-DASH. OES had stronger correlations with the anchor items, and AUC values suggested superior discrimination (between improved and not improved) compared with QuickDASH. OES also had superior signal-to-noise ratio compared with QuickDASH., Conclusion: The study provides MID and PASS values for OES and QuickDASH. Due to better longitudinal validity, OES may be a better choice for clinical trials., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02425982 (first registered April 24, 2015)., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objectives: We aimed to determine (1) the proportion of women authors overall, in first (lead) and last (senior) author positions, (2) the proportion of women research participants and (3) the association between women in first and/or last author positions and the proportion of women research participants in original research articles and editorials/opinion pieces in four sport and exercise medicine/physiotherapy journals., Methods: The journals evaluated were the British Journal of Sports Medicine , Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy , Physical Therapy in Sport and International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy .We reviewed all original research articles and editorials/opinion pieces published in 2008, 2009, 2018 and 2019. For each, we aimed to determine the gender/sex of all authors (through gender pronouns, Google Scholar, ResearchGate, institutional profiles, personal websites, photographs and/or social media), and the gender/sex of study participants reported as 'female' or 'male' or 'women' or 'men' or 'girls' or 'boys'., Results: We included 952 original studies and 219 editorials/opinion pieces. There were 5146 authors of original studies and 706 authors of editorials/opinion pieces. Compared with 2008/2009, the proportion of women as first and last authors was 3.6% (33.0% compared with 29.4%) and 4.8% (33.2% compared with 27.4%) higher respectively in 2018/2019. On average, the proportion of women participants in original studies remained largely unchanged over the 10-year period, only 10% of all participants were women in studies., Conclusion: Women are strikingly under-represented in first and last author positions, as are women participants in sports and exercise medicine/physiotherapy journals., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CLA has served as editor-in-chief for JOSPT (Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy) since 2018. JST has served as editor for BJSM (British Journal of Sports Medicine) since 2021. EKR has served as a senior associate editor (BJSM) since 2017. ABM has served as an associate/deputy editor at (BJSM) since 2017, associate editor at JSAMS since 2020, associate editor at IJSPT since 2020. BP has served as an associate editor at BJSM since 2021., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The limited research on prognosis after nonsurgical management of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury has focused on physical factors. We aimed to assess relationships between key patient-reported outcomes, in line with a biopsychosocial approach, and returning to preinjury sport at 12 months after ACL injury treated without reconstruction., Hypothesis: We hypothesized that biopsychosocial factors would be associated with returning to preinjury sport at 12 months after ACL injury., Study Design: Prospective single cohort study., Level of Evidence: Level 2., Methods: Patients who had an ACL injury and did not have reconstruction during the first year after injury were recruited from healthcare clinics in Sweden, and followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months after injury. Return to preinjury sport at 12 months was the primary outcome. Explanatory variables were psychological readiness to return to sport, knee-related quality of life, and self-reported knee function. Using generalized estimating equations, we evaluated the relationships between the explanatory variables and the primary outcome at each timepoint., Results: Data were analyzed for 88 participants with a median age of 27 years (15-40 years). Soccer was the most frequently reported preinjury sport (n = 22). Forty participants (46%) had returned to their preinjury sport at 12 months after ACL injury. The odds of returning to preinjury sport at 12 months increased with higher self-reported knee function at 6 months (odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1), and the odds of being returned to the preinjury sport at 12 months doubled for every 1-point increase (1-10 scale) in psychological readiness to return to sport measured at 12 months (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.2)., Conclusion: Superior self-reported knee function at 6 months and greater psychological readiness to return to sport at 12 months were associated with returning to the preinjury sport 1 year after ACL injury treated without reconstruction., Clinical Relevance: Consider highlighting the relevance of biopsychosocial factors to returning to preinjury sport after ACL injury when discussing prognosis during shared decision-making.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: SMA, PB, DR, AF, AS, EM, VM, RWW, IS, JLO, SG-J, MC and TG declare they have no competing interests.HPD is an associate editor for BJSM; CLA is Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT); JLK is an editor of BJSM; ABM is a BJSM deputy editor; AP is an editor at BMJ; KMK was Editor-in-Chief of BJSM from 2008 to 2020 but holds no position with BJSM or BMJ Group at present (June 2022). Collaborator group: JT and NM are BJSM editors; KT and FW are BJSM deputy editors; LE is BJSM IPHP editor; JoT, CJvR, SK, and AW are BJSM associate editors.

The state of open science needs to be monitored to track changes over time and identify areas to create interventions to drive improvements. In order to monitor open science practices, they first need to be well defined and operationalized. To reach consensus on what open science practices to monitor at biomedical research institutions, we conducted a modified 3-round Delphi study. Participants were research administrators, researchers, specialists in dedicated open science roles, and librarians. In rounds 1 and 2, participants completed an online survey evaluating a set of potential open science practices, and for round 3, we hosted two half-day virtual meetings to discuss and vote on items that had not reached consensus. Ultimately, participants reached consensus on 19 open science practices. This core set of open science practices will form the foundation for institutional dashboards and may also be of value for the development of policy, education, and interventions., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: CLA is the editor-in-chief of JOSPT (Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy). The other authors declare no conflicts., (Copyright: © 2023 Cobey et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Introduction: Primary cam morphology is highly prevalent in many athlete populations, causing debilitating hip osteoarthritis in some. Existing research is mired in confusion partly because stakeholders have not agreed on key primary cam morphology elements or a prioritised research agenda. We aimed to inform a more rigorous, inclusive and evidence-based approach to research on primary cam morphology and its natural history by working towards agreement on a set of research priorities for conditions affecting the young person's hip., Methods: An international expert panel-the Young Athlete's Hip Research (YAHiR) Collaborative-rated research priority statements through an online two-round Delphi exercise and met online to explore areas of tension and dissent. Panellists ranked the prioritised research statements according to the Essential National Health Research (ENHR) ranking strategy. Reporting of results followed REPRISE (REporting guideline for PRIority SEtting of health)., Results: A diverse Delphi panel (n=65, Delphi rounds 1 and 2; three ENHR strategy surveys: n=49; n=44; n=42) from 18 countries representing six stakeholder groups, prioritised and ranked 18 of 38 research priority statements. The prioritised statements outlined seven research domains: (1) best practice physiotherapy, (2) rehabilitation progression and return to sport, (3) exercise intervention and load management, (4) primary cam morphology prognosis and aetiology, (5) femoroacetabular impingement syndrome prognosis and aetiology, (6) diagnostic criteria, and (7) screening. The panel recommended areas of tension and dissent for the research community to focus on immediately., Conclusion: While informing more rigorous, inclusive and evidence-based research, this consensus is a roadmap for researchers, policy-makers and funders to implement research dedicated to reducing the cost and burden of hip disease related to primary cam morphology., Competing Interests: Competing interests: HPD is an associate editor for BJSM; CLA is Editor-in-Chief for Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT); JK is an editor for BJSM; ABM is a BJSM deputy editor; AP is an editor at BMJ; KMK was editor-in-chief for BJSM from 2008 to 2020 but holds no position with BJSM or BMJ Group at present (June 2022).SM, PB, DR, AF, AS, EM, VM, RWW, JLO, SG-J, MC and TG declare no competing interests.Young Athlete’s Hip Research (YAHiR) Collaborative collaborators: Jane Thornton (JT) and NM are BJSM editors; KT and FW are BJSM deputy editors; LE is BJSM IPHP editor; Johannes Tol (JT), CJvR, SK, and AW are BJSM associate editors., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: Primary cam morphology is a mostly benign bony prominence that develops at the femoral head-neck junction of the hip, but it is highly prevalent in many athlete populations. In the small proportion of athletes for whom it is not benign, the resulting hip osteoarthritis can be debilitating. Clinicians, athletes, patients and researchers do not yet agree on important primary cam morphology elements. We aimed to ascertain and improve the level of agreement on primary cam morphology definitions, terminology, taxonomy and imaging outcome measures., Methods: To collect and aggregate informed opinions, an expert panel-the Young Athlete's Hip Research Collaborative-rated primary cam morphology definition, terminology, taxonomy and imaging outcome statements through an online Delphi exercise followed by an online meeting to explore areas of tension and dissent. Reporting followed Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies., Results: A diverse and inclusive Delphi panel (n=65 for rounds 1 and 2, representing 18 countries; 6 stakeholder groups; 40% women) agreed on 35 of 47 statements in 4 domains, while surfacing areas of tension and dissent. This Delphi panel agreed on four key issues essential to moving research and clinical care forward around primary cam morphology. They agreed on: (1) definition, confirming its conceptual attributes (tissue type, size, location, shape and ownership); (2) terminology-use 'morphology' and not terms with a negative connotation like 'lesion', 'abnormality' or 'deformity'; (3) taxonomy, distinguishing between primary and secondary cam morphology, and (4) imaging outcomes, a continuous bone/cartilage alpha angle on radial femoral head-neck MRI for primary cam morphology aetiology research., Conclusion: This consensus provides athletes, patients, clinicians and researchers with a strong foundation to guide more precise communication, better clinical decision-making and higher value research about primary cam morphology and its natural history., Competing Interests: Competing interests: HPD is a BJSM Associate Editor; CLA is Editor-in-Chief of Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT); SM, PB, DR, AF, AS, EM, VM, RWW, KMK, JLO, SG-J, MC and TG—none to declare; JK is an editor of BJSM; ABM is BJSM Deputy Editor; AP is an editor at BMJ;KMK was Editor-in-Chief of BJSM from 2008 to 2020 but holds no position with BJSM or BMJ Group at present (June 2022).Collaborator group: JT and NM are editors of BJSM; KT and FW are BJSM Deputy Editors; LE is BJSM IPHP Editor; SB, CJvR, JoT, AW, SK and FW are BJSM Associate Editors., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: This scoping review examines how different levels and types of partial foot amputation affect gait and explores how these findings may affect the minimal impairment criteria for wheelchair tennis., Methods: Four databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTDiscus) were systematically searched in February 2021 for terms related to partial foot amputation and ambulation. The search was updated in February 2022. All study designs investigating gait-related outcomes in individuals with partial foot amputation were included and independently screened by two reviewers based on Arksey and O'Malley's methodological framework and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews., Results: Twenty-nine publications with data from 252 participants with partial foot amputation in 25 studies were analysed. Toe amputations were associated with minor gait abnormalities, and great toe amputations caused loss of push-off in a forward and lateral direction. Metatarsophalangeal amputations were associated with loss of stability and decreased gait speed. Ray amputations were associated with decreased gait speed and reduced lower extremity range of motion. Transmetatarsal amputations and more proximal amputations were associated with abnormal gait, substantial loss of power generation across the ankle and impaired mobility., Conclusions: Partial foot amputation was associated with various gait changes, depending on the type of amputation. Different levels and types of foot amputation are likely to affect tennis performance. We recommend including first ray, transmetatarsal, Chopart and Lisfranc amputations in the minimum impairment criteria, excluding toe amputations (digits two to five), and we are unsure whether to include or exclude great toe, ray (two to five) and metatarsophalangeal amputations., Trial Registration: The protocol of this scoping review was previously registered at the Open Science Framework Registry (https://osf.io/8gh9y) and published., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CA is Editor-in-Chief for JOSPT and JST is Editor for BJSM. At the time of writing, BMP was a classification consultant for the ITF, tasked to review the ITF minimum impairment criteria, and Chair of the ITF Classification Working Group., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

The goal of the OPTIKNEE consensus is to improve knee and overall health, to prevent osteoarthritis (OA) after a traumatic knee injury. The consensus followed a seven-step hybrid process. Expert groups conducted 7 systematic reviews to synthesise the current evidence and inform recommendations on the burden of knee injuries; risk factors for post-traumatic knee OA; rehabilitation to prevent post-traumatic knee OA; and patient-reported outcomes, muscle function and functional performance tests to monitor people at risk of post-traumatic knee OA. Draft consensus definitions, and clinical and research recommendations were generated, iteratively refined, and discussed at 6, tri-weekly, 2-hour videoconferencing meetings. After each meeting, items were finalised before the expert group (n=36) rated the level of appropriateness for each using a 9-point Likert scale, and recorded dissenting viewpoints through an anonymous online survey. Seven definitions, and 8 clinical recommendations (who to target, what to target and when, rehabilitation approach and interventions, what outcomes to monitor and how) and 6 research recommendations (research priorities, study design considerations, what outcomes to monitor and how) were voted on. All definitions and recommendations were rated appropriate (median appropriateness scores of 7-9) except for two subcomponents of one clinical recommendation, which were rated uncertain (median appropriateness score of 4.5-5.5). Varying levels of evidence supported each recommendation. Clinicians, patients, researchers and other stakeholders may use the definitions and recommendations to advocate for, guide, develop, test and implement person-centred evidence-based rehabilitation programmes following traumatic knee injury, and facilitate data synthesis to reduce the burden of knee post-traumatic knee OA., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JLW, AGC, BP, EM and CE are associate editors of the British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM). CLA is the editor in chief and JLW an editor with the Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT). AGC is an associate editor of Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. SF is an associate editor for Journal of Science in Medicine and Sport. JBT holds a research grant from Pfizer outside the submitted work. STS is co-founders of Good Life with Osteoarthritis from Denmark (GLA:D), associate editor of the JOSPT and has received grants from the Lundbeck Foundation and personal fees from Munksgaard and TrustMe-Ed, outside the submitted work. CMT is project leader of GLA:D, Ireland. MAR is a project leader of the Active Living with Osteoarthritis in Norway (AktivA), a not-for-profit initiative to implement clinical guidelines in primary health care in Norway. ER is a deputy editor of Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, developer of Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score and several other freely available patient-reported outcomes, and founder of GLA:D. KMC is a senior advisor of BJSM, project leader of the GLA:D, Australia, and holds a research grant from Levin Health outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Two common ways of assessing the clinical relevance of treatment outcomes are the minimal important difference (MID) and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS). The former represents the smallest change in the given outcome that makes people feel better, while the latter is the symptom level at which patients feel well., Methods: We recruited 124 patients with a humeral shaft fracture to a randomised controlled trial comparing surgery to nonsurgical care. Outcome instruments included the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, the Constant-Murley score, and two numerical rating scales (NRS) for pain (at rest and on activities). A reduction in DASH and pain scores, and increase in the Constant-Murley score represents improvement. We used four methods (receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve, the mean difference of change, the mean change, and predictive modelling methods) to determine the MID, and two methods (the ROC and 75th percentile) for the PASS. As an anchor for the analyses, we assessed patients' satisfaction regarding the injured arm using a 7-item Likert-scale., Results: The change in the anchor question was strongly correlated with the change in DASH, moderately correlated with the change of the Constant-Murley score and pain on activities, and poorly correlated with the change in pain at rest (Spearman's rho 0.51, -0.40, 0.36, and 0.15, respectively). Depending on the method, the MID estimates for DASH ranged from -6.7 to -11.2, pain on activities from -0.5 to -1.3, and the Constant-Murley score from 6.3 to 13.5. The ROC method provided reliable estimates for DASH (-6.7 points, Area Under Curve [AUC] 0.77), the Constant-Murley Score (7.6 points, AUC 0.71), and pain on activities (-0.5 points, AUC 0.68). The PASS estimates were 14 and 10 for DASH, 2.5 and 2 for pain on activities, and 68 and 74 for the Constant-Murley score with the ROC and 75th percentile methods, respectively., Conclusion: Our study provides credible estimates for the MID and PASS values of DASH, pain on activities and the Constant-Murley score, but not for pain at rest. The suggested cut-offs can be used in future studies and for assessing treatment success in patients with humeral shaft fracture., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01719887, first registration 01/11/2012., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Accurate and reliable evaluation of muscle strength in para-athletes is essential for monitoring the effectiveness of strength training and/or rehabilitation programmes, and sport classification. Our aim is to synthesise evidence related to assessing muscle strength in para-athletes. Four databases were searched from January 1990 to July 2021 for observational studies focusing on strength assessment. Independent screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed in duplicate. A total of 1764 potential studies were identified. Thirty met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The mean age of participants was 30.7 years (standard deviation [ SD ]: 2.4). The majority were men (88%) participating in wheelchair sports, including basketball, rugby, and tennis (23/30: 76%). Overall quality varied, with more than half of the studies failing to identify strategies for dealing with confounding variables. Despite manual muscle testing being a standard component of para-sport classification systems, evidence examining strength characteristics in para-athletes is derived primarily from isometric and isokinetic testing. In studies that included comparative strength data, findings were mixed. Some studies found strength values were similar to or lower than able-bodied athletic controls. However, an important observation was that others reported higher shoulder strength in para-athletes taking part in wheelchair sports than both able-bodied and disabled non-athletes. Studies need to develop accessible, standardised strength testing methods that account for training influence and establish normative strength values in para-athletes. There is also a need for additional studies that include female para-athletes and para-athletes with greater functional impairments., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2022 Chengdu Sport University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd.)

Background: After a serious knee injury, up to half of athletes do not return to competitive sport, despite recovering sufficient physical function. Athletes often desire psychological support for the return to sport, but rehabilitation clinicians feel ill-equipped to deliver adequate support., Objective: We aimed to design and develop an internet-delivered psychological support program for athletes recovering from knee ligament surgery., Methods: Our work for developing and designing the Back in the Game intervention was guided by a blend of theory-, evidence-, and target population-based strategies for developing complex interventions. We systematically searched for qualitative evidence related to athletes' experiences with, perspectives on, and needs for recovery and return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. Two reviewers coded and synthesized the results via thematic meta-synthesis. We systematically searched for randomized controlled trials reporting on psychological support interventions for improving ACL rehabilitation outcomes in athletes. One reviewer extracted the data, including effect estimates; a second reviewer checked the data for accuracy. The results were synthesized descriptively. We conducted feasibility testing in two phases-(1) technical assessment and (2) feasibility and usability testing. For phase 1, we recruited clinicians and people with lived experience of ACL injury. For phase 2, we recruited patients aged between 15 and 30 years who were within 8 weeks of ACL reconstruction surgery. Participants completed a 10-week version of the intervention and semistructured interviews for evaluating acceptability, demand, practicality, and integration. This project was approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (approval number: 2018/45-31)., Results: The following three analytic themes emerged from the meta-synthesis (studies: n=16; participants: n=164): (1) tools or strategies for supporting rehabilitation progress, (2) barriers and facilitators for the physical readiness to return to sport, and (3) barriers and facilitators for the psychological readiness to return to sport. Coping strategies, relaxation, and goal setting may have a positive effect on rehabilitation outcomes after ACL reconstruction (randomized controlled trials: n=7; participants: n=430). There were no trials of psychological support interventions for improving the return to sport. Eleven people completed phase 1 of feasibility testing (technical assessment) and identified 4 types of software errors, which we fixed. Six participants completed the feasibility and usability testing phase. Their feedback suggested that the intervention was easy to access and addressed the needs of athletes who want to return to sport after ACL reconstruction. We refined the intervention to include more multimedia content and support access to and the use of the intervention features., Conclusions: The Back in the Game intervention is a 24-week, internet-delivered, self-guided program that comprises 7 modules that complement usual rehabilitation, changes focus as rehabilitation progresses, is easy to access and use, and includes different psychological support strategies., (©Clare L Ardern, Nicholas Hooper, Paul O'Halloran, Kate E Webster, Joanna Kvist. Originally published in JMIR Formative Research (https://formative.jmir.org), 09.08.2022.)

The REPORT guide is a 'How to' guide to help you report your clinical research in an effective and transparent way. It is intended to supplement established first choice reporting tools, such as Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), by adding tacit knowledge (ie, learnt, informal or implicit knowledge) about reporting topics that we have struggled with as authors or see others struggle with as journal reviewers or editors. We focus on the randomised controlled trial, but the guide also applies to other study designs. Topics included in the REPORT guide cover reporting checklists, trial report structure, choice of title, writing style, trial registry and reporting consistency, spin or reporting bias, transparent data presentation (figures), open access considerations, data sharing and more. Preprint (open access): https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/qsxdz., Competing Interests: Competing interests: CLA was Deputy Editor (Systematic Reviews) for BJSM from 2016 to 2018 and is currently the Editor-in-Chief for JOSPT. TB and KT are BJSM editorial board members., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and Patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation (PRWHE) are patient-reported outcomes frequently used for evaluating pain and function of the wrist and hand. The aim of this study was to determine thresholds for minimal important difference (MID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for NRS pain and PRWHE instruments in patients with base of thumb osteoarthritis., Methods: Fifty-two patients with symptomatic base of thumb osteoarthritis wore a splint for six weeks before undergoing trapeziectomy. NRS pain (0 to 10) and PRWHE (0 to 100) were collected at the time of recruitment (baseline), after splint immobilization prior to surgery, and at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after surgery. Four anchor-based methods were used to determine MID for NRS pain and PRWHE: the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve, the mean difference of change (MDC), the mean change (MC) and the predictive modelling methods. Two approaches were used to determine PASS for NRS pain and PRWHE: the 75 th percentile and the ROC curve methods. The anchor question for MID was the change perceived by the patient compared with baseline; the anchor question for PASS was whether the patient would be satisfied if the condition were to stay similar. The correlation between the transition anchor at baseline and the outcome at all time points combined was calculated using the Spearman's rho analysis., Results: The MID for NRS pain was 2.5 using the ROC curve method, 2.0 using the MDC method, 2.8 using the MC method, and 2.5 using the predictive modelling method. The corresponding MIDs for PRWHE were 22, 24, 10, and 20. The PASS values for NRS pain and PRWHE were 2.5 and 30 using the ROC curve method, and 2.0 and 22 using the 75th percentile method, respectively. The area under curve (AUC) analyses showed excellent discrimination for all measures., Conclusion: We found credible MID estimates for NRS and PRWHE (including its subscales), although the MID estimates varied depending on the method used. The estimates were 20-30% of the range of scores of the instruments. The cut-offs for MID and PASS showed good or excellent discrimination, lending support for their use in future studies., Trial Registration: This clinimetrics study was approved by the Helsinki University ethical review board (HUS1525/2017)., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Return-to-sport (RTS) decisions are critical to clinical sports medicine and are often characterised by uncertainties, such as re-injury risk, time pressure induced by competition schedule and social stress from coaches, families and supporters. RTS decisions have implications not only for the health and performance of an athlete, but also the sports organisation. RTS decision-making is a complex process, which relies on evaluating multiple biopsychosocial factors, and is influenced by contextual factors. In this narrative review, we outline how RTS decision-making of clinicians could be evaluated from a decision analysis perspective. To begin with, the RTS decision could be explained as a sequence of steps, with a decision basis as the core component. We first elucidate the methodological considerations in gathering information from RTS tests. Second, we identify how decision-making frameworks have evolved and adapt decision-making theories to the RTS context. Third, we discuss the preferences and perspectives of the athlete, performance coach and manager. We conclude by proposing a framework for clinicians to improve the quality of RTS decisions and make recommendations for daily practice and research., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Tennis elbow is a common painful enthesopathy of the lateral elbow that limits upper limb function and frequently results in lost time at work. Surgeons often recommend surgery if symptoms persist despite nonsurgical management, but operations for tennis elbow are inconsistent in their efficacy, and what we know about those operations often derives from observational studies that assume the condition does not continue to improve over time. This assumption is largely untested, and it may not be true; meta-analyzing results from the control arms of tennis elbow studies can help us to evaluate this premise, but to our knowledge, this has not been done., Questions/purposes: The aims of this systematic review were to describe the course of (1) global improvement, (2) pain, and (3) disability in participants who received no active treatment (placebo or no treatment) in published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on tennis elbow. We also assessed (4) whether the duration of symptoms or placebo effect is associated with differences in symptom trajectories., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL from database inception to August 12, 2019, for trials including participants with tennis elbow and a placebo or a no-treatment arm and a minimum follow-up duration of 6 months. There were no language restrictions or exclusion criteria. We extracted global improvement, pain, and disability outcomes. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool to assess the risk of bias of included trials. To estimate the typical course of tennis elbow without active treatment, we pooled global improvement (the proportion of participants who reported feeling much better or completely recovered), mean pain, and mean disability using baseline, 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up data. We transformed pain and disability data from the original papers so that at each timepoint the relevant outcome was expressed as change relative to baseline to account for different baseline values. We used meta-regression to assess whether the placebo effect or duration of symptoms before enrollment was associated with differences in symptom trajectories. We included 24 trials with 1085 participants who received no active treatment., Results: The number of patients who were not improved decreased exponentially over time. The half-life of global improvement was between 2.5 and 3 months (that is, every 2.5 to 3 months, 50% of the remaining symptomatic patients reported complete recovery or greatly improved symptoms). At 1 year, 89% (189 of 213; 95% CI 80% to 97%) of patients experienced global improvement. The mean pain and disability followed a similar pattern, halving every 3 to 4 months. Eighty-eight percent of pain (95% CI 70% to 100%) and 85% of disability (95% CI 60% to 100%) had resolved by 1 year. The mean duration of symptoms before trial enrollment was not associated with differences in symptom trajectories. The trajectories of the no-treatment and placebo arms were similar, indicating that the placebo effect of the studied active treatments likely is negligible., Conclusion: Based on the placebo or no-treatment control arms of randomized trials, about 90% of people with untreated tennis elbow achieve symptom resolution at 1 year. The probability of resolution appears to remain constant throughout the first year of follow-up and does not depend on previous symptom duration, undermining the rationale that surgery is appropriate if symptoms persist beyond a certain point of time. We recommend that clinicians inform people who are frustrated with persisting symptoms that this is not a cause for apprehension, given that spontaneous improvement is about as likely during the subsequent few months as it was early after the symptoms first appeared. Because of the high likelihood of spontaneous recovery, any active intervention needs to be justified by high levels of early efficacy and little or no risk to outperform watchful waiting., Level of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study., Competing Interests: Each author certifies that there are no funding or commercial associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article related to the author or any immediate family members. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request., (Copyright © 2021 by the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons.)

Complex systems are open systems consisting of many components that can interact among themselves and the environment. New forms of behaviours and patterns often emerge as a result. There is a growing recognition that most sporting environments are complex adaptive systems. This acknowledgement extends to sports injury and is reflected in the individual responses of athletes to both injury and rehabilitation protocols. Consequently, practitioners involved in return to sport decision making (RTS) are encouraged to view return to sport decisions through the complex systems lens to improve decision-making in rehabilitation. It is important to clarify the characteristics of this theoretical framework and provide concrete examples to which practitioners can easily relate. This review builds on previous literature by providing an overview of the hallmark features of complex systems and their relevance to RTS research and daily practice. An example of how characteristics of complex systems are exhibited is provided through a case of anterior cruciate ligament injury rehabilitation. Alternative forms of scientific inquiry, such as the use of computational and simulation-based techniques, are also discussed-to move the complex systems approach from the theoretical to the practical level., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Poor reporting of medical and healthcare systematic reviews is a problem from which the sports and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science fields are not immune. Transparent, accurate and comprehensive systematic review reporting helps researchers replicate methods, readers understand what was done and why, and clinicians and policy-makers implement results in practice. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and its accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document provide general reporting examples for systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. However, implementation guidance for sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science does not exist. The Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science (PERSiST) guidance attempts to address this problem. Nineteen content experts collaborated with three methods experts to identify examples of exemplary reporting in systematic reviews in sport and exercise medicine (including physical activity), musculoskeletal rehabilitation (including physiotherapy), and sports science, for each of the PRISMA 2020 Statement items. PERSiST aims to help: (1) systematic reviewers improve the transparency and reporting of systematic reviews and (2) journal editors and peer reviewers make informed decisions about systematic review reporting quality., Competing Interests: Competing interests: RA, MCA, FB, MC, SH, FMI, SM, MSR, GS, BV, JLW, MW and AAW declare they have no competing interests. CLA was a Deputy Editor (Systematic Reviews) for BJSM from 2016 to 2018. ED, HPD and AW are associate editors for BJSM. MCA was a member of the BJSM editorial board from 2008 to 2020. KMK was Editor-in-Chief of BJSM from 2008 to 2020. He holds no position with the BJSM or the BMJ Group at present (September 2021). DM is Chair of the PRISMA group, led the PRISMA 2009 statement and co-led the PRISMA 2020 statement. MJP co-led the PRISMA 2020 statement. ES was editor of BJSM from 2017 to 2020, and editor-in-chief of BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine from 2019 to 2020. He is a senior adviser to BJSM (September 2021)., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Synopsis: There is an absence of high-quality evidence to support rehabilitation and return-to-sport decisions following shoulder injuries in athletes. The Athlete Shoulder Consensus Group was convened to lead a consensus process that aimed to produce best-practice guidance for clinicians, athletes, and coaches for managing shoulder injuries in sport. We developed the consensus via a 2-round Delphi process (involving more than 40 content and methods experts) and an in-person meeting. This consensus statement provides guidance with respect to load and risk management, supporting athlete shoulder rehabilitation, and decision making during the return-to-sport process. This statement is designed to offer clinicians the flexibility to apply principle-based approaches to managing the return-to-sport process within a variety of sporting backgrounds. The principles and consensus of experts working across multiple sports may provide a template for developing additional sport-specific guidance in the future. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(1):11-28. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.10952 .