Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 869

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

British Journal Of Sports Medicine

Open access
MacNeil, Justine·2015·Wilderness & Environmental Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.wem.2014.12.005
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Participation in rock climbing has grown significantly in recent years, in both youth and adult populations. Injury patterns, incidence rates, and mechanisms of injury have been studied mostly in adults, focusing on injuries occurring during traditional rock climbing, ice climbing, or alpine climbing. This cross-sectional study aimed to examine injury rates, mechanism, and risk factors for youths who participate in rock climbing and bouldering. The investigators distributed surveys to recreational and elite youth climbers between the ages of 11 and 19 years at 10 indoor climbing facilities in Alberta, Canada, between October 2012 and March 2013. The questionnaire included demographic information, climbing experience, discipline, time spent climbing per week, and injuries sustained while climbing, along with anatomic location of injury, mechanism of injury, and subsequent time lost from climbing. In all, 285 climbers were approached, 62 competitive and 223 recreational climbers (n = 285), of whom 126 (44%) consented to participate, and 116 (41%) completed the questionnaire. The investigators found that the injury incidence rate was 4.44 injuries per 1000 climbing hours (95% confidence interval: 3.74 to 5.23), with sprains (27%) and strains (26%) predominating. The primary mechanism of injury was repetitive overuse (42%), and the most common injury locations were hands and fingers (21%). Falling resulted in a larger percentage of lower extremity injuries. These findings are consistent with reported rates, injury types, and mechanism of injury in adults. Older age, injury in another sport, and preventative taping were risk factors for injury in young climbers. This study was limited by selection bias, self-reporting, and power as the target sample size of 206 was not achieved. The study does provide insight into the injuries and risk factors for young climbers, however, and provides guidance for further investigation into modifiable risk factors, which, in turn, can be used to develop preventative strategies to target high-risk youth climbers. (Br J Sports Med. 2015;1:44–50) KY Woollings, CD McKay, J Kang, et al.

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 · 10.1016/j.wem.2014.12.005

Cites

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

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
MacNeil, J.
Venue
Wilderness & Environmental Medicine
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2015-03
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
98-99
ISSN
  • 1080-6032 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1534
DOI
10.1016/j.wem.2014.12.005
OpenAlex
W4235576743
Cited by
869
References
0
FWCI
49.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.