Cargando…
Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review
PURPOSE: Injuries are common in sports and can have significant physical, psychological and financial consequences. Machine learning (ML) methods could be used to improve injury prediction and allow proper approaches to injury prevention. The aim of our study was therefore to perform a systematic re...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8046881/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33855647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40634-021-00346-x |
_version_ | 1783678928814080000 |
---|---|
author | Van Eetvelde, Hans Mendonça, Luciana D. Ley, Christophe Seil, Romain Tischer, Thomas |
author_facet | Van Eetvelde, Hans Mendonça, Luciana D. Ley, Christophe Seil, Romain Tischer, Thomas |
author_sort | Van Eetvelde, Hans |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Injuries are common in sports and can have significant physical, psychological and financial consequences. Machine learning (ML) methods could be used to improve injury prediction and allow proper approaches to injury prevention. The aim of our study was therefore to perform a systematic review of ML methods in sport injury prediction and prevention. METHODS: A search of the PubMed database was performed on March 24th 2020. Eligible articles included original studies investigating the role of ML for sport injury prediction and prevention. Two independent reviewers screened articles, assessed eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. Methodological quality and risk of bias were determined by the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Study quality was evaluated using the GRADE working group methodology. RESULTS: Eleven out of 249 studies met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Different ML methods were used (tree-based ensemble methods (n = 9), Support Vector Machines (n = 4), Artificial Neural Networks (n = 2)). The classification methods were facilitated by preprocessing steps (n = 5) and optimized using over- and undersampling methods (n = 6), hyperparameter tuning (n = 4), feature selection (n = 3) and dimensionality reduction (n = 1). Injury predictive performance ranged from poor (Accuracy = 52%, AUC = 0.52) to strong (AUC = 0.87, f1-score = 85%). CONCLUSIONS: Current ML methods can be used to identify athletes at high injury risk and be helpful to detect the most important injury risk factors. Methodological quality of the analyses was sufficient in general, but could be further improved. More effort should be put in the interpretation of the ML models. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40634-021-00346-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8046881 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80468812021-04-30 Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review Van Eetvelde, Hans Mendonça, Luciana D. Ley, Christophe Seil, Romain Tischer, Thomas J Exp Orthop Review Paper PURPOSE: Injuries are common in sports and can have significant physical, psychological and financial consequences. Machine learning (ML) methods could be used to improve injury prediction and allow proper approaches to injury prevention. The aim of our study was therefore to perform a systematic review of ML methods in sport injury prediction and prevention. METHODS: A search of the PubMed database was performed on March 24th 2020. Eligible articles included original studies investigating the role of ML for sport injury prediction and prevention. Two independent reviewers screened articles, assessed eligibility, risk of bias and extracted data. Methodological quality and risk of bias were determined by the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Study quality was evaluated using the GRADE working group methodology. RESULTS: Eleven out of 249 studies met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Different ML methods were used (tree-based ensemble methods (n = 9), Support Vector Machines (n = 4), Artificial Neural Networks (n = 2)). The classification methods were facilitated by preprocessing steps (n = 5) and optimized using over- and undersampling methods (n = 6), hyperparameter tuning (n = 4), feature selection (n = 3) and dimensionality reduction (n = 1). Injury predictive performance ranged from poor (Accuracy = 52%, AUC = 0.52) to strong (AUC = 0.87, f1-score = 85%). CONCLUSIONS: Current ML methods can be used to identify athletes at high injury risk and be helpful to detect the most important injury risk factors. Methodological quality of the analyses was sufficient in general, but could be further improved. More effort should be put in the interpretation of the ML models. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40634-021-00346-x. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8046881/ /pubmed/33855647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40634-021-00346-x Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Paper Van Eetvelde, Hans Mendonça, Luciana D. Ley, Christophe Seil, Romain Tischer, Thomas Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review |
title | Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review |
title_full | Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review |
title_short | Machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review |
title_sort | machine learning methods in sport injury prediction and prevention: a systematic review |
topic | Review Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8046881/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33855647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40634-021-00346-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vaneetveldehans machinelearningmethodsinsportinjurypredictionandpreventionasystematicreview AT mendoncalucianad machinelearningmethodsinsportinjurypredictionandpreventionasystematicreview AT leychristophe machinelearningmethodsinsportinjurypredictionandpreventionasystematicreview AT seilromain machinelearningmethodsinsportinjurypredictionandpreventionasystematicreview AT tischerthomas machinelearningmethodsinsportinjurypredictionandpreventionasystematicreview |