PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Baseball and softball are popular sports with similar rates of injury, especially among pitchers. However, parity between the two sports is lacking, as baseball receives greater research attention than softball. The purpose of this study was to describe the discrepancy between baseball and softball in terms of quantity and quality of research. We hypothesized baseball literature would outnumber softball literature, be published in higher-impact journals, and be of higher quality.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review was performed to identify original research articles related to baseball and softball from 1990 to 2020. Articles pertaining to pitching were identified via literature searches of PubMed, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and further screened by two independent reviewers. Age group studied, journal impact factor, type of research, and level of evidence were compared between pitching-related baseball and softball articles. Injury-related studies were also subanalyzed, and a meta-analysis was performed to assess rates of shoulder and elbow injuries between baseball and softball pitchers.
UNASSIGNED: There were 813 baseball publications and 158 softball publications that met our inclusion criteria. More baseball articles were published per year than softball (5:1, P < .001). Baseball had 368 articles related to pitching, while softball had significantly fewer at 49, and there were more baseball pitching articles published per year than softball pitching articles (7.5:1, P < .001). Pitching-related baseball articles were published in journals with a higher mean impact factor than softball pitching articles (3.1 vs. 2.0, P = .049). There was no difference in methodological index for non-randomized studies criteria for rigorous reporting (P = .678), and among all groups, most articles were level III evidence. Baseball pitching articles included more clinical articles than softball pitching articles (63% vs. 43%, P = .004). Despite the fact that softball pitchers have an odds ratio of shoulder and elbow injury slightly higher than baseball (4.02 vs. 3.60), injury-related studies focused on baseball outnumbered softball studies 7 to 1.
UNASSIGNED: Softball is under-represented in the literature when compared to baseball with over 5 times fewer peer-reviewed research articles, despite having slightly higher shoulder and elbow injury rates than baseball. Pitching-related softball articles are nearly 8 times less frequent compared to baseball pitching articles and published in journals with a lower impact factor. Further research directed at softball is important to provide evidence-based injury prevention, practice guidelines, and treatment decisions.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review was performed to identify original research articles related to baseball and softball from 1990 to 2020. Articles pertaining to pitching were identified via literature searches of PubMed, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and further screened by two independent reviewers. Age group studied, journal impact factor, type of research, and level of evidence were compared between pitching-related baseball and softball articles. Injury-related studies were also subanalyzed, and a meta-analysis was performed to assess rates of shoulder and elbow injuries between baseball and softball pitchers.
UNASSIGNED: There were 813 baseball publications and 158 softball publications that met our inclusion criteria. More baseball articles were published per year than softball (5:1, P < .001). Baseball had 368 articles related to pitching, while softball had significantly fewer at 49, and there were more baseball pitching articles published per year than softball pitching articles (7.5:1, P < .001). Pitching-related baseball articles were published in journals with a higher mean impact factor than softball pitching articles (3.1 vs. 2.0, P = .049). There was no difference in methodological index for non-randomized studies criteria for rigorous reporting (P = .678), and among all groups, most articles were level III evidence. Baseball pitching articles included more clinical articles than softball pitching articles (63% vs. 43%, P = .004). Despite the fact that softball pitchers have an odds ratio of shoulder and elbow injury slightly higher than baseball (4.02 vs. 3.60), injury-related studies focused on baseball outnumbered softball studies 7 to 1.
UNASSIGNED: Softball is under-represented in the literature when compared to baseball with over 5 times fewer peer-reviewed research articles, despite having slightly higher shoulder and elbow injury rates than baseball. Pitching-related softball articles are nearly 8 times less frequent compared to baseball pitching articles and published in journals with a lower impact factor. Further research directed at softball is important to provide evidence-based injury prevention, practice guidelines, and treatment decisions.
摘要：
■棒球和垒球是受伤率相似的流行运动，尤其是在投手中。然而,这两项运动之间缺乏平等，因为棒球比垒球受到更大的研究关注。这项研究的目的是描述棒球和垒球在研究数量和质量方面的差异。我们假设棒球文学会超过垒球文学，发表在影响力更大的期刊上，质量更高。
■进行了系统回顾，以确定1990年至2020年与棒球和垒球有关的原始研究文章。与投球有关的文章是通过PubMed的文献检索确定的，物理治疗证据数据库,护理和相关健康文献的累积指数，和Cochrane中央受控试验登记册，并由两名独立审稿人进一步筛选。年龄组研究，期刊影响因子，研究类型,并比较了与投球相关的棒球和垒球文章的证据水平。还对损伤相关研究进行了亚分析，我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估棒球投手和垒球投手的肩部和肘部损伤率.
■有813种棒球出版物和158种垒球出版物符合我们的入选标准。每年发表的棒球文章比垒球文章多（5：1，P<.001）。棒球有368篇与投球有关的文章，而垒球的数量明显少于49，并且每年发表的棒球投球文章比垒球投球文章多（7.5：1，P<.001）。与投球相关的棒球文章在期刊上发表的平均影响因子高于垒球投球文章（3.1vs.2.0，P=.049）。严格报告的非随机研究标准的方法学指数没有差异(P=.678)，在所有群体中，大多数文章是三级证据。棒球投球用品比垒球投球用品包括更多的临床用品（63%与43%,P=.004）。尽管垒球投手的肩膀和肘部受伤的赔率比略高于棒球（4.02vs.3.60),与伤害相关的研究集中在棒球数量超过垒球的研究7比1。
■与棒球相比，垒球在文献中的代表性不足，同行评审的研究文章少了5倍以上，尽管肩部和肘部受伤率略高于棒球。与投球相关的垒球文章比棒球投球文章少近8倍，并且在影响因子较低的期刊上发表。针对垒球的进一步研究对于提供基于证据的伤害预防很重要，实践指南，和治疗决定。
■进行了系统回顾，以确定1990年至2020年与棒球和垒球有关的原始研究文章。与投球有关的文章是通过PubMed的文献检索确定的，物理治疗证据数据库,护理和相关健康文献的累积指数，和Cochrane中央受控试验登记册，并由两名独立审稿人进一步筛选。年龄组研究，期刊影响因子，研究类型,并比较了与投球相关的棒球和垒球文章的证据水平。还对损伤相关研究进行了亚分析，我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以评估棒球投手和垒球投手的肩部和肘部损伤率.
■有813种棒球出版物和158种垒球出版物符合我们的入选标准。每年发表的棒球文章比垒球文章多（5：1，P<.001）。棒球有368篇与投球有关的文章，而垒球的数量明显少于49，并且每年发表的棒球投球文章比垒球投球文章多（7.5：1，P<.001）。与投球相关的棒球文章在期刊上发表的平均影响因子高于垒球投球文章（3.1vs.2.0，P=.049）。严格报告的非随机研究标准的方法学指数没有差异(P=.678)，在所有群体中，大多数文章是三级证据。棒球投球用品比垒球投球用品包括更多的临床用品（63%与43%,P=.004）。尽管垒球投手的肩膀和肘部受伤的赔率比略高于棒球（4.02vs.3.60),与伤害相关的研究集中在棒球数量超过垒球的研究7比1。
■与棒球相比，垒球在文献中的代表性不足，同行评审的研究文章少了5倍以上，尽管肩部和肘部受伤率略高于棒球。与投球相关的垒球文章比棒球投球文章少近8倍，并且在影响因子较低的期刊上发表。针对垒球的进一步研究对于提供基于证据的伤害预防很重要，实践指南，和治疗决定。
