Related Experiment Videos
Athletic injury reporting. Development of universal systems
1Sport Medicine Centre, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada. meeuwiss@acs.ucalgary.ca
Sports Medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)
|November 5, 1997
Summary
Comparing athletic injury data requires standardized reporting systems. This review examines North American systems, highlighting the need for clear definitions and methods to improve epidemiological understanding and data comparability.
Area of Science:
- Sports Medicine
- Epidemiology
- Public Health
Background:
- Numerous athletic injury reporting systems exist, but data comparability is limited.
- Advancing athletic injury epidemiology necessitates the ability to compare data from diverse sources.
- Existing systems in North America vary in their epidemiological designs and reporting approaches.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review existing athletic injury reporting systems in North America.
- To outline the epidemiological designs, strengths, and weaknesses of various reporting systems.
- To provide recommendations for developing more universal athletic injury reporting systems.
Main Methods:
- Review of existing athletic injury reporting systems in North America.
- Delineation of case-series and cohort epidemiological designs.
- Discussion of key factors: injury definition, sources of error, denominator data, and exposure estimation.
Main Results:
- Strengths and weaknesses of different reporting approaches were identified.
- Differences between case-series and cohort methods were clarified.
- The importance of specific elements for accurate injury reporting was discussed.
Conclusions:
- Four recommendations are proposed to enhance data comparability and standardization.
- Clear indication of reporting system design and data collection methods is crucial.
- Standardized injury definitions, outcome data collection, and acknowledgment of limitations are essential for universal systems.