Bayesian methods for estimating injury rates in sport injury epidemiology.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Avinash Chandran, Ben Lambert
{"title":"Bayesian methods for estimating injury rates in sport injury epidemiology.","authors":"Avinash Chandran, Ben Lambert","doi":"10.1186/s40621-025-00583-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The injury rate is a common measure of injury occurrence in epidemiological surveillance and is used to express the incidence of injuries as a function of both the population at risk as well as at-risk exposure time. Traditional approaches to surveillance-based injury rates use a frequentist perspective; here, we discuss the Bayesian perspective and present a practical framework on how to apply a Bayesian analysis to estimate injury rates. We estimated finescale injury rates across a broad range of categories for men's and women's soccer, applying a Bayesian methodology and using injury surveillance data captured within the National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance Program from 2014/15-2018/19.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Through an iterative process of assessing model fidelity, we found that a negative binomial model was an effective choice for modeling surveillance-based injury rates. We also found differences between schools to be a key driver of variation in injury rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings indicate that the Bayesian framework naturally characterizes injury rates by modeling injury counts as outcomes of an underlying data-generation process that explicitly incorporates inherent uncertainty, complementing traditional frequentist approaches. Key benefits of the Bayesian approach in this context are the ability to test model suitability in a variety of methods, and to be able to generate plausible estimates with sparse data.</p>","PeriodicalId":37379,"journal":{"name":"Injury Epidemiology","volume":"12 1","pages":"31"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12142926/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-025-00583-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The injury rate is a common measure of injury occurrence in epidemiological surveillance and is used to express the incidence of injuries as a function of both the population at risk as well as at-risk exposure time. Traditional approaches to surveillance-based injury rates use a frequentist perspective; here, we discuss the Bayesian perspective and present a practical framework on how to apply a Bayesian analysis to estimate injury rates. We estimated finescale injury rates across a broad range of categories for men's and women's soccer, applying a Bayesian methodology and using injury surveillance data captured within the National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance Program from 2014/15-2018/19.

Results: Through an iterative process of assessing model fidelity, we found that a negative binomial model was an effective choice for modeling surveillance-based injury rates. We also found differences between schools to be a key driver of variation in injury rates.

Conclusions: Our findings indicate that the Bayesian framework naturally characterizes injury rates by modeling injury counts as outcomes of an underlying data-generation process that explicitly incorporates inherent uncertainty, complementing traditional frequentist approaches. Key benefits of the Bayesian approach in this context are the ability to test model suitability in a variety of methods, and to be able to generate plausible estimates with sparse data.

运动损伤流行病学中损伤率估计的贝叶斯方法。
背景:伤害率是流行病学监测中常见的伤害发生率指标,用于表达伤害发生率与危险人群和危险暴露时间的函数关系。基于监视的伤害率的传统方法使用频率论的观点;在这里,我们讨论贝叶斯的观点,并提出了一个实用的框架,如何应用贝叶斯分析来估计伤害率。我们采用贝叶斯方法,并使用2014/15-2018/19年全国大学体育协会损伤监测计划中捕获的损伤监测数据,估计了男子和女子足球各种类别的精细损伤率。结果:通过评估模型保真度的迭代过程,我们发现负二项模型是基于监视的伤害率建模的有效选择。我们还发现,学校之间的差异是造成受伤率差异的一个关键因素。结论:我们的研究结果表明,贝叶斯框架通过将损伤计数建模为潜在数据生成过程的结果,自然地表征了损伤率,该过程明确包含固有的不确定性,补充了传统的频率论方法。在这种情况下,贝叶斯方法的主要优点是能够在各种方法中测试模型的适用性,并且能够使用稀疏数据生成可信的估计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Injury Epidemiology
Injury Epidemiology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
34
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Injury Epidemiology is dedicated to advancing the scientific foundation for injury prevention and control through timely publication and dissemination of peer-reviewed research. Injury Epidemiology aims to be the premier venue for communicating epidemiologic studies of unintentional and intentional injuries, including, but not limited to, morbidity and mortality from motor vehicle crashes, drug overdose/poisoning, falls, drowning, fires/burns, iatrogenic injury, suicide, homicide, assaults, and abuse. We welcome investigations designed to understand the magnitude, distribution, determinants, causes, prevention, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and outcomes of injuries in specific population groups, geographic regions, and environmental settings (e.g., home, workplace, transport, recreation, sports, and urban/rural). Injury Epidemiology has a special focus on studies generating objective and practical knowledge that can be translated into interventions to reduce injury morbidity and mortality on a population level. Priority consideration will be given to manuscripts that feature contemporary theories and concepts, innovative methods, and novel techniques as applied to injury surveillance, risk assessment, development and implementation of effective interventions, and program and policy evaluation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信