Christopher Leckey, Nicol van Dyk, Cailbhe Doherty, Aonghus Lawlor, Eamonn Delahunt
{"title":"机器学习方法在运动损伤风险预测:与证据合成的范围审查","authors":"Christopher Leckey, Nicol van Dyk, Cailbhe Doherty, Aonghus Lawlor, Eamonn Delahunt","doi":"10.1136/bjsports-2024-108576","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective This study reviewed the current state of machine learning (ML) research for the prediction of sports-related injuries. It aimed to chart the various approaches used and assess their efficacy, considering factors such as data heterogeneity, model specificity and contextual factors when developing predictive models. Design Scoping review. Data sources PubMed, EMBASE, SportDiscus and IEEEXplore. Results In total, 1241 studies were identified, 58 full texts were screened, and 38 relevant studies were reviewed and charted. Football (soccer) was the most commonly investigated sport. Area under the curve (AUC) was the most common means of model evaluation; it was reported in 71% of studies. In 60% of studies, tree-based solutions provided the highest statistical predictive performance. Random Forest and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) were found to provide the highest performance for injury risk prediction. Logistic regression outperformed ML methods in 4 out of 12 studies. Three studies reported model performance of AUC>0.9, yet the clinical relevance is questionable. Conclusions A variety of different ML models have been applied to the prediction of sports-related injuries. While several studies report strong predictive performance, their clinical utility can be limited, with wide prediction windows or broad definitions of injury. The efficacy of ML is hampered by small datasets and numerous methodological heterogeneities (cohort sizes, definition of injury and dependent variables), which were common across the reviewed studies. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.","PeriodicalId":9276,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Machine learning approaches to injury risk prediction in sport: a scoping review with evidence synthesis\",\"authors\":\"Christopher Leckey, Nicol van Dyk, Cailbhe Doherty, Aonghus Lawlor, Eamonn Delahunt\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bjsports-2024-108576\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective This study reviewed the current state of machine learning (ML) research for the prediction of sports-related injuries. It aimed to chart the various approaches used and assess their efficacy, considering factors such as data heterogeneity, model specificity and contextual factors when developing predictive models. Design Scoping review. Data sources PubMed, EMBASE, SportDiscus and IEEEXplore. Results In total, 1241 studies were identified, 58 full texts were screened, and 38 relevant studies were reviewed and charted. Football (soccer) was the most commonly investigated sport. Area under the curve (AUC) was the most common means of model evaluation; it was reported in 71% of studies. In 60% of studies, tree-based solutions provided the highest statistical predictive performance. Random Forest and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) were found to provide the highest performance for injury risk prediction. Logistic regression outperformed ML methods in 4 out of 12 studies. Three studies reported model performance of AUC>0.9, yet the clinical relevance is questionable. Conclusions A variety of different ML models have been applied to the prediction of sports-related injuries. While several studies report strong predictive performance, their clinical utility can be limited, with wide prediction windows or broad definitions of injury. The efficacy of ML is hampered by small datasets and numerous methodological heterogeneities (cohort sizes, definition of injury and dependent variables), which were common across the reviewed studies. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9276,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Sports Medicine\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Sports Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2024-108576\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2024-108576","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Machine learning approaches to injury risk prediction in sport: a scoping review with evidence synthesis
Objective This study reviewed the current state of machine learning (ML) research for the prediction of sports-related injuries. It aimed to chart the various approaches used and assess their efficacy, considering factors such as data heterogeneity, model specificity and contextual factors when developing predictive models. Design Scoping review. Data sources PubMed, EMBASE, SportDiscus and IEEEXplore. Results In total, 1241 studies were identified, 58 full texts were screened, and 38 relevant studies were reviewed and charted. Football (soccer) was the most commonly investigated sport. Area under the curve (AUC) was the most common means of model evaluation; it was reported in 71% of studies. In 60% of studies, tree-based solutions provided the highest statistical predictive performance. Random Forest and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) were found to provide the highest performance for injury risk prediction. Logistic regression outperformed ML methods in 4 out of 12 studies. Three studies reported model performance of AUC>0.9, yet the clinical relevance is questionable. Conclusions A variety of different ML models have been applied to the prediction of sports-related injuries. While several studies report strong predictive performance, their clinical utility can be limited, with wide prediction windows or broad definitions of injury. The efficacy of ML is hampered by small datasets and numerous methodological heterogeneities (cohort sizes, definition of injury and dependent variables), which were common across the reviewed studies. All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) is a dynamic platform that presents groundbreaking research, thought-provoking reviews, and meaningful discussions on sport and exercise medicine. Our focus encompasses various clinically-relevant aspects such as physiotherapy, physical therapy, and rehabilitation. With an aim to foster innovation, education, and knowledge translation, we strive to bridge the gap between research and practical implementation in the field. Our multi-media approach, including web, print, video, and audio resources, along with our active presence on social media, connects a global community of healthcare professionals dedicated to treating active individuals.