No abstract

To prevent sports injuries, researchers have aimed to understand injury aetiology from both the natural and social sciences and through applying different methodologies. This research has produced strong disciplinary knowledge and a number of injury prevention programmes. Yet, the injury rate continues to be high, especially in youth sport and youth football. A key reason for the continued high injury rate is the development of injury prevention programmes based on monodisciplinary knowledge that does not account for the complex nature of sport injury aetiology. The purpose of this paper is to consider and outline an interdisciplinary research process to research the complex nature of sport injury aetiology. To support our proposition, we first present a narrative review of existing youth football and youth sport injury research demonstrating an absence of paradigmatic integration across the research areas’ main disciplines of biomedicine, psychology and sociology. We then demonstrate how interdisciplinary research can address the complexity of youth sport injury aetiology. Finally, we introduce the interdisciplinary process we have recently followed in a youth football injury research project. While further research is necessary, particularly regarding the integration of qualitative and quantitative sport injury data, we propose that the pragmatic interdisciplinary research process can be useful for researchers who aim to work across disciplines and paradigms and aim to employ methodological pluralism in their research.

Background The Oslo Sport Trauma Research Centre Questionnaire on Health Problems (OSTRC-H) has become a popular tool to monitor health status in athletes. Originally developed for adult athletes, the tool is today also being used in adolescent athletes. However, little is known on the suitability of the questionnaire for the adolescent age group and the methodological implications of applying the tool to prospectively monitor illness and injury. To address this gap in methodological knowledge, the aim of this study is to outline and discuss the adaption and application process of the OSTRC-H to adolescent football players. Method The adaption process included a slightly modified back-translation method to translate the questionnaire. The application process included a web-based version of the Swedish OSTRC-H sent out once a week over 23 weeks to 115 adolescent football players aged 10-19 attending two football schools in Sweden. The response rate and prevalence of health problems over 23 weeks were calculated as feasibility indicators. Additionally, comprehensibility questions were added to the questionnaire in the end of the study. Result No major disagreement was found between the original and translated versions of the questionnaire. However, significant changes to the wording of the questions and answer categories were necessary to adapt it to adolescents. A visual body figure was also added. The average weekly response rate was 38% (SD 13.5). To increase this rate, questionnaire data was gathered retrospectively through telephone and email contact with the participants and their parents, elevating the response rate to 53% (SD 15.5). The adolescents experienced the questionnaire as easy to understand and to cover all relevant health problems. Conclusion Our study demonstrates the importance of adapting the questionnaire to the adolescent target group through translation, pre-tests, adjustments of wording and the facilitation of answering the questionnaire using a visual body figure. The study further shows the importance of keeping close and personal contact with the participants, their parents, teachers, and coaches throughout data collection. Future studies should take into account the age group and study context when adapting and applying the OSTRC-H to adolescents.

Background To understand and prevent sport injuries, scholars have employed different scientific approaches and methods. Traditionally, this research has been monodisciplinary, focusing on one subdiscipline of sport science and applying qualitative or quantitative methods. Recently, scholars have argued that traditional approaches fail to address the complexity of sport injuries, and, as a way forward, have called for pluralistic approaches involving the application of both qualitative and quantitative methods. At present, pluralist sport injury research is at the theoretical level and best practice examples are rare. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to (1) outline the Interdisciplinary Case Analysis Procedure (ICAP); and (2) provide implications for future interdisciplinary sport injury analysis. Method We adopt an established definition and operationalisation of interdisciplinary research and a case study approach to develop and pilot the ICAP for qualitative and quantitative sport injury datasets. The development and piloting of ICAP was possible with the use of injury datasets from the interdisciplinary research project “Injury-free children and adolescents: Towards better practice in Swedish football” (the FIT project). All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines. Result The ICAP consists of three stages and works as a guide for interdisciplinarity, where the team first creates a common ground and a more comprehensive understanding of sport injuries; second, collates analysed qualitative and quantitative sport injury data into a multilevel data catalogue; and third, conducts an integrated discussion of data. Conclusion The integrated discussion is key to create new insights into sport injury aetiology and requires researchers to be creative, flexible, and acknowledge other scientific perspectives throughout the procedure. The ICAP strengthens the integrated analysis of qualitative and quantitative data and may be applied to address other complex phenomena.

Background To understand and prevent sport injuries, scholars have employed different scientific approaches and research methods. Traditionally, this research has been monodisciplinary, relying on one subdiscipline of sport science and applying qualitative or quantitative research methods. Recently, scholars have argued that traditional approaches fail to address contextual components of sport and the nonlinear interactions between different aspects in and around the athlete, and, as a way forward, called for alternative approaches to sport injury research. Discussion of alternative approaches are today taking place, however, practical examples that demonstrate what such approaches entails are rare. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to draw on an interdisciplinary research approach to (1) outline an interdisciplinary case analysis procedure (ICAP); and (2) provide an example for future interdisciplinary sport injury research. Methods We adopt an established definition and application of interdisciplinary research to develop and pilot the ICAP for interdisciplinary sport injury teams aiming to integrate qualitative and quantitative sport injury data. The development and piloting of ICAP was possible by drawing on work conducted in the interdisciplinary research project “Injury-free children and adolescents: Towards better practice in Swedish football” (the FIT project). Results The ICAP guides interdisciplinary sport injury teams through three stages: 1. Create a more comprehensive understanding of sport injury aetiology by drawing on existing knowledge from multiple scientific perspectives; 2. Collate analysed qualitative and quantitative sport injury data into a multilevel data catalogue; and 3. Engage in an integrated discussion of the collated data in the interdisciplinary research team. Conclusion The ICAP is a practical example of how an interdisciplinary team of sport injury scholars can approach the complex problem of sport injury aetiology and work to integrate qualitative and quantitative data through three stages. The ICAP is a step towards overcoming the obstacles of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods and data that scholars have identified.