CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 114Knee injuries and reconstruction techniquesSport Psychology and PerformanceSports and Physical Education Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Feedback Techniques to Target Functional Deficits Following Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Implications for Motor Control and Reduction of Second Injury Risk

Open access
Gokeler, Alli, Benjaminse, Anne, Hewett, Timothy E., Paterno, Mark V., Ford, Kevin R., Otten, Egbert, Myer, Gregory D.·2013·Sports Medicine
DOI 10.1007/s40279-013-0095-0PMC PMC4166506
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Primary anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury prevention training has been shown to reduce the risk of injury. Less is known about the effect of prevention on second injury after ACL reconstruction (ACLR). Given recent findings that second injury rates exceed 20 % in only the first year following the return to sport, it is imperative that rehabilitation after ACLR is scrutinized so that second injury preventative strategies can be optimized. A potential limitation of current rehabilitative processes following ACLR could be a deficiency in the transition from conscious awareness achieved during rehabilitation sessions to unexpected and automatic movements required for athletic activities on the field. Learning strategies with an internally directed focus have traditionally been utilized but may be less suitable for acquisition of control of complex motor skills required for sport reintegration. Conversely, an externally focused rehabilitation strategy may enhance skill acquisition more efficiently and increase the potential to transfer to competitive sport. This article presents new insights gained from the motor learning domain that may improve neuromuscular training programmes via increased retention from improved techniques and may ultimately reduce the incidence of second ACL injuries.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40279-013-0095-0

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Zachry TL, Wulf G, Mercer JA. Effects of focus of attention on reach height. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2005;27:S162–3.
  2. Hewett TE, Di Stasi SL, Myer GD. Current concepts for injury prevention in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(1):216–24. · DOI
  3. Ford KR, DiCesare C, Myer GD, et al. Real-time biofeedback for ACL injury prevention. American Society of Biomechanics Annual Meeting; Gainesville; 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 114

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Gokeler, A., Benjaminse, A., Hewett, T. E., Paterno, M. V., Ford, K. R., Otten, E., & Myer, G. D.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
  • Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center (US)
  • High Point University (US)
Corresponding author
Gokeler, Alli
ORCID
Venue
Sports Medicine
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2013-09-24
Volume
43
Issue
11
Pages
1065-1074
ISSN
  • 0112-1642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1179-2035
DOI
10.1007/s40279-013-0095-0
PMC
PMC4166506
OpenAlex
W2048097582
Cited by
114
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5
FWCI
6.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Sports Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (R01 AR05563, R01AR049735, R01AR055563, R01AR056259)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Sports and Physical Education Research
Keywords
anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, second ACL injury, injury prevention training, external focus, internal focus, motor learning, motor control, neuromuscular training, rehabilitation, skill transfer, return to sport, motor skill retention
MeSH terms
Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries, Athletic Injuries, Biomechanical Phenomena, Postural Balance, Exercise Therapy, Feedback, Humans, Knee Injuries, Learning, Motor Skills, Movement, Sports, Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review