The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effectiveness of a home-based balance-training program in reducing sports-related injuries among healthy adolescents: a cluster randomized controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Sport is the leading cause of injury requiring medical attention among adolescents. We studied the effectiveness of a home-based balance-training program using a wobble board in improving static and dynamic balance and reducing sports-related injuries among healthy adolescents. METHODS: In this cluster randomized controlled trial, we randomly selected 10 of 15 high schools in Calgary to participate in the fall of 2001. We then recruited students from physical education classes and randomly assigned them, by school, to either the intervention (n = 66) or the control (n = 61) group. Students in the intervention group participated in a daily 6-week and then a weekly 6-month home-based balance-training program using a wobble board. Students at the control schools received testing only. The primary outcome measures were timed static and dynamic balance, 20-m shuttle run and vertical jump, which were measured at baseline and biweekly for 6 weeks. Self-reported injury data were collected over the 6-month follow-up period. RESULTS: At 6 weeks, improvements in static and dynamic balance were observed in the intervention group but not in the control group (difference in static balance 20.7 seconds, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.8 to 30.6 seconds; difference in dynamic balance 2.3 seconds, 95% CI 0.7 to 4.0 seconds). There was evidence of a protective effect of balance training in over 6 months (relative risk of injury 0.2, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.88). The number needed to treat to avoid 1 injury over 6 months was 8 (95% CI 4 to 35). INTERPRETATION: Balance training using a wobble board is effective in improving static and dynamic balance and reducing sports-related injuries among healthy adolescents.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Practical Statistics for Medical Research
Altman, D. G. (1990) · doi:10.1201/9780429258589 · Cited by 10,668
Cited by
Faigenbaum, A. D., Kraemer, W. J., Blimkie, C. J. R., Jeffreys, I., Micheli, L. J., Nitka, M., & Rowland, T. W. (2009) · Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · doi:10.1519/jsc.0b013e31819df407 · Cited by 1,209
DiFiori, J. P., Benjamin, H. J., Brenner, J. S., Gregory, A., Jayanthi, N., Landry, G. L., & Luke, A. (2014) · British Journal of Sports Medicine · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2013-093299 · Cited by 816
Vriend, I., Gouttebarge, V., Finch, C. F., van Mechelen, W., & Verhagen, E. A. L. M. (2017) · Sports Medicine · doi:10.1007/s40279-017-0718-y · Cited by 108
Gamada, K. (2014) · International Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · doi:10.4172/2329-9096.1000246 · Cited by 12
Effect of Exergame Intervention on Balance Ability of Adolescents: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Zhang, C., Han, T., Tan, X., Yu, C., Li, S., Zheng, H., Zhu, D., Zhang, Y., & Shen, T. (2023) · Games for Health Journal · doi:10.1089/g4h.2022.0182 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Emery, C. A.
- Venue
- Canadian Medical Association Journal
- Publisher
- CMA Joule Inc.
- Published
- 2005-03-15
- Volume
- 172
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 749-754
- ISSN
- 0820-3946 (ISSN-L)
- 1488-2329
- OpenAlex
- W2127234911
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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.