Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 374

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Clinical risk factors for hamstring muscle strain injury: a prospective study with correlation of injury by magnetic resonance imaging

Open access
Verrall, G M, Slavotinek, J P, Barnes, P G, Fon, G T, Spriggins, A J·2001·British Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Objective—To prospectively establish risk factors for hamstring muscle strain injury using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to define the diagnosis of posterior thigh injury. Method—In a prospective cohort study using two elite Australian Rules football clubs, the anthropometric characteristics and past clinical history of 114 athletes were recorded. Players were followed throughout the subsequent season, with posterior thigh injuries being documented. Hamstring intramuscular hyperintensity on T2 weighted MRI was required to meet our criteria for a definite hamstring injury. Statistical associations were sought between anthropometric and previous clinical characteristics and hamstring muscle injury. Results—MRI in 32 players showed either hamstring injury (n = 26) or normal scans (n = 6). An association existed between a hamstring injury and each of the following: increasing age, being aboriginal, past history of an injury to the posterior thigh or knee or osteitis pubis (all p<0.05). These factors were still significant when players with a past history of posterior thigh injury (n = 26) were excluded. Previous back injury was associated with a posterior thigh injury that looked normal on MRI scan, but not with an MRI detected hamstring injury. Conclusions—Hamstring injuries are common in Australian football, and previous posterior thigh injury is a significant risk factor. Other factors, such as increasing age, being of aboriginal descent, or having a past history of knee injury or osteitis pubis, increase the risk of hamstring strain independently of previous posterior thigh injury. However, as the numbers in this study are small, further research is needed before definitive statements can be made.

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 · 10.1136/bjsm.35.6.435

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

See all 374

Metadata

Authors
Verrall, G. M., Slavotinek, J. P., Barnes, P. G., Fon, G. T., & Spriggins, A. J.
Venue
British Journal of Sports Medicine
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2001-12
Volume
35
Issue
6
Pages
435-439
ISSN
  • 0306-3674 (ISSN-L)
  • 1473-0480
OpenAlex
W2101474372
Cited by
374
References
0
FWCI
7.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical risk factors for hamstring muscle strain injury: a prospective study with correlation of injury by magnetic resonance imaging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bjsm.35.6.435
The paper
Verrall, G. M., Slavotinek, J. P., Barnes, P. G., Fon, G. T., & Spriggins, A. J. (2001). Clinical risk factors for hamstring muscle strain injury: a prospective study with correlation of injury by magnetic resonance imaging. British Journal of Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsm.35.6.435

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.