Journal of Sport Rehabilitation

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 3 (Mar 2021)

JSR JIF: 1.650The Journal of Sport Rehabilitation (JSR) is your source for the latest peer-reviewed research in the field of sport rehabilitation. All members of the sports-medicine team will benefit from the wealth of important information in each issue. JSR is completely devoted to the rehabilitation of sport and exercise injuries, regardless of the age, gender, sport ability, level of fitness, or health status of the participant. JSR increased publication from 6 to 8 issues per year in 2019 (January, February, March, May, July, August, September, and November).

Mission

The editorial mission of JSR is to advance the understanding of all aspects of sport rehabilitation, particularly in the areas of therapeutic exercise, therapeutic modalities, injury evaluation, and the psychological aspects of rehabilitation. JSR publishes peer-reviewed original research, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, critically appraised topics (CATs), case studies/series, and technical reports that directly affect the management and rehabilitation of injuries incurred during sport-related activities, irrespective of the individual’s age, gender, sport ability, level of fitness, or health status. The journal is intended to provide an international, multidisciplinary forum to serve the needs of all members of the sports medicine team, including athletic trainers/therapists, sport physical therapists/physiotherapists, sports medicine physicians, and other health care and medical professionals.

Original Research Reports. JSR publishes original research reports on all aspects of the sport and exercise rehabilitation process.

Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses. These manuscripts are systematic, critical assessments of literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics. Emphasis should include cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapeutic intervention, therapeutic rehabilitation, or prevention.

Critically Appraised Topics (CATs). JSR encourages submission of CATs, which provide evidence-based clinicians a brief summary of available evidence focused around a specific clinical question in sport rehabilitation. A CAT is shorter and undergoes a less rigorous critical review for answering a clinical question than a systematic review.

Case Studies. JSR publishes case studies that present carefully recorded observations of rehabilitation programs or processes among sport and exercise participants. Case studies must present unusual or rare injuries or conditions or present unique approaches to common ones. They should present a unique rehabilitation or treatment that leads to an increased standard of care.

Technical Reports. JSR publishes, online only, short articles that present results related to a new or modified method, instrument, or clinical technique; validity/reliability or methods; or an important experimental observation within the scope of the journal.

JSR will also publish special issues that are oriented toward a specific sport rehabilitation theme. The editor solicits special issue topic suggestions.

Editor

Kellie C. Huxel Bliven, PhD, ATC
A.T. Still University, USA

Editors Emeriti

David Perrin (Founding Editor: 1992–1995)
Scott Lephart (1996–1999)
Christopher Ingersoll (2000–2003)
Buz Swanik (2004–2006)
Carl G. Mattacola (2007–2019)

Associate Editors

Tamara C. Valovich McLeod, PhD, ATC, FNATA
A.T. Still University, USA

Erik A. Wikstrom, PhD, ATC, FNATA, FACSM
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA

Editorial Assistants

Hannah Duszynski, A.T. Still University, USA

Nicole Strout, ATC, A.T. Still University, USA

Clinical Outcomes Consultant

Alison Snyder Valier, PhD, ATC, A.T. Still University, USA

Statistical Consultants

Emily Van Meter Dressler, PhD, Wake Forest School of Medicine, USA

Editorial Board

William M. Adams, PhD, ATC, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, USA

Barton E. Anderson, DHSc, AT, A.T. Still University, USA

Brent Arnold, PhD, ATC, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, USA

Gul Baltaci, PhD, PT, Hacettepe University, Turkey

Tab Blackburn, MEd, PT, ATC, ATI Physical Therapy, USA

Lori A. Bolgla, PhD, PT, ATC, Georgia Regents University, USA

Michelle C. Boling, PhD, ATC, University of North Florida, USA

Timothy A. Butterfield, PhD, ATC, University of Kentucky, USA

Douglas J. Casa, PhD, ATC, University of Connecticut, USA

Brian Caulfield, PhD, University College Dublin, Ireland

Scott W. Cheatham, PhD, DPT, PT, OCS, ATC, CSCS, California State University Dominguez Hills, USA

Mitchell Cordova, PhD, ATC, Florida Gulf Coast University, USA

Mutlu Cuğ, PhD, Kocaeli University, Turkey

Richard DeMont, PhD, CAT(C), ATC, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada

Craig R. Denegar, PhD, ATC, PT, University of Connecticut, USA

Justin DiSanti, PhD, A.T. Still University, USA

Michael G. Dolan, MA, ATC, Canisius College, USA

Luke Donovan, PhD, ATC, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA

Geoffrey Dover, PhD, CAT(C), ATC, Concordia University, Canada

Reed Ferber, PhD, CAT(C), ATC, University of Calgary, Canada

A. Louise Fincher, EdD, ATC, LAT, University of Texas at Arlington, USA

Neal Glaviano, PhD, ATC, The University of Toledo, USA

Kevin Guskiewicz, PhD, ATC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA

Karrie Hamstra-Wright, PhD, ATC, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA

Gulcan Harput, PT, PhD, Hacettepe University, Turkey

Joseph M. Hart, PhD, ATC, University of Virginia, USA

Rod A. Harter, PhD, ATC, Texas State University, USA

Charlie A. Hicks-Little, PhD, ATC, University of Utah, USA

Matthew Hoch, PhD, ATC, University of Kentucky, USA

J. Ty Hopkins, PhD, ATC, Brigham Young University, USA

Megan Houston, PhD, AT, Keller Army Community Hospital, USA

Tricia Hubbard Turner, PhD, ATC, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA

Wendy L. Hurley, PhD, ATC, CSCS, State University of New York College at Cortland, USA

Cale Jacobs, PhD, ATC, University of Kentucky, USA

Jupil Ko, PhD, ATC, Incheon National University, South Korea

Kenneth C. Lam, ScD, ATC, A.T. Still University, USA

Christian Lattermann, MD, Brigham and Women's Hospital, USA

Kevin Laudner, PhD, ATC, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, USA

Robert C. Lynall, PhD, ATC, University of Georgia, USA

Robert C. Manske, PT, DPT, MEd, SCS, ATC, SCSC, Wichita State University, USA

Jennifer Medina McKeon, PhD, ATC, Ithaca College, USA

Patrick O. McKeon, PhD, ATC, Ithaca College, USA

Mark A. Merrick, PhD, ATC, The Ohio State University, USA

Gregory D. Myer, PhD, University of Cincinnati, USA

Alan Needle, PhD, ATC, Appalachian State University, USA

Yum Nguyen, PhD, ATC, West Virginia University, USA

John T. Parsons, PhD, ATC, NCAA Sport Science Institute, USA

Kelsey J. Picha, PhD, ATC, A.T. Still University, USA

Brian G. Pietrosimone, PhD, ATC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA

Michael Pohl, PhD, University of Puget Sound, USA

Cameron Powden, PhD, AT, University of Indianapolis, USA

Johna Register-Mihalik, PhD, LAT, ATC, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA

Michael P. Reiman, PT, DPT, OCS, ATC, CSCS, Duke University, USA

Hayley Root, PhD, ATC, Monmouth University, USA

Matthew K. Seeley, PhD, ATC, Brigham Young University, USA

Amee L. Seitz, PhD, DPT, Northwestern University, USA

Chad A. Starkey, PhD, ATC, Ohio University, USA

C. Buz Swanik, PhD, ATC, University of Delaware, USA

Tim Tyler, MS, PT, ATC, The Nicholas Institute of Sports Medicine and Athletic Trauma, USA

Bonnie L. Van Lunen, PhD, ATC, Old Dominion University, USA

Steven M. Zinder, PhD, ATC, University of North Carolina Wilmington, USA

Human Kinetics Staff
Doug Hoepker, Senior Journals Managing Editor

Prior to submission, please carefully read and follow the submission guidelines detailed below. Authors must submit their manuscripts through the journal’s ScholarOne online submission system. To submit, click the button below:

Submit a Manuscript

Authorship Guidelines

The Journals Division at Human Kinetics adheres to the criteria for authorship as outlined by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors*:

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for the content. Authorship credit should be based only on substantial contributions to:

a. Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data; and
b. Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and
c. Final approval of the version to be published.

Conditions a, b, and c must all be met. Individuals who do not meet the above criteria may be listed in the acknowledgments section of the manuscript. *Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. (1991). New England Journal of Medicine, 324, 424–428.

Open Access

Human Kinetics is pleased to allow our authors the option of having their articles published Open Access. In order for an article to be published Open Access, authors must complete and return the Request for Open Access form and provide payment for this option. To learn more and request Open Access, click here.

Manuscript Guidelines

The Journal of Sport Rehabilitation publishes peer-reviewed original research, systematic reviews/meta-analyses, critically appraised topics (CATs), case studies/series, and technical reports that directly advance the understanding and application of rehabilitation of injuries incurred during sport-related activities. Authors interested in submitting a letter to the editor or review article must contact the editor for approval prior to submission. Submissions must align with the JSR mission.

Format/Preparation Guidelines

It is recommended that authors use the appropriate JSR manuscript preparation checklist when preparing their submission. This document is provided for guidance; it should not be included in the submission.

Text

Submissions must be prepared in English as a typed Microsoft Word document. The document must be double-spaced, include page and continuous line numbers, and use margins of 1 in (2.5 cm).

Cover Letter

A cover letter must be submitted that details why the submission would be a good fit for JSR's readership and be signed by the corresponding author. The cover letter must also state that the manuscript has not been previously published (except in abstract form), is not presently under consideration by another journal, and will not be submitted to another journal before a final editorial decision from JSR is rendered.

Title Page

A separate title page file is required and must include the following:

  • Title of the manuscript (15 word limit)
  • Name(s) of author(s), institutional affiliation(s), and Twitter handle(s) for all author(s)
  • Contact information (e-mail address and phone numbers) of the corresponding author who is to receive the proofs. If the study was a registered clinical trial, indicate the registration number. Finally, the title page should include acknowledgements, sources of funding, as well as any potential Conflict of Interest(s) by the authors.
  • Authors should include 2–3 highlights or take home points that can be used to help promote published manuscripts on social media. Limit each highlight to one sentence.

Manuscript Blinding

JSR uses a double-blinded peer review process for all submissions. It is important that authors ensure integrity of blinded peer review by following the guidelines below.

  • No identifying author or institutional information may be included any place in the main body of the manuscript, figures and tables, or videos (ie, title page, subjects, methods, funding, acknowledgements).
  • If the study was a registered clinical trial, indicate "registration number XXX" in the body of the manuscript and include the actual registration number in the Title Page file (see below).
  • Acknowledgements, sources of funding, and conflict of interest statements must be blinded in the body of the manuscript; unblinded acknowledgements may be submitted in the Title Page file (see below).
  • Remove identifying information created within Microsoft Word settings (File → Info → Inspect Document).
  • For authors invited to revise and resubmit their manuscript for further peer review:
    • No identifying author or institutional information (signature, letterhead, file name) may be included in the "Response to Reviewer" portion of the resubmission.
    • Do not re-insert identifying information into the body of the manuscript (subjects, methods, funding, acknowledgements).
    • Track changes and comments in the body of the manuscript may not be used to signify revised text. Revised text color should be different (ex: red font) or highlighted.

Body of Manuscript

The main body of manuscripts (submit as a separate file) must begin with the title of the manuscript and an abstract of no more than 300 words. Abstract requirements are specific to the manuscript type; refer to specific instructions below. Immediately following the abstract, 3–5 keywords must be included. The keywords cannot replicate words included in the title.

Writing should be concise and direct, and use first person active voice. Avoid using unnecessary jargon and abbreviations. Acronyms or abbreviations may be used if it is more commonly recognized than the spelled-out version of a term. Follow the AMA Manual of Style, 11th edition for formatting and style, including numbers and units of measurement (metric). JSR discourages the use of already printed and copyrighted materials. If necessary, the author must include a letter granting permission to reprint the material. Authors are responsible for all financial costs associated with permission to use such materials. The required structure of each manuscript type is detailed below.

References

Referencing style should be consistent with Index Medicus for journal abbreviations and follow the AMA Manual of Style, 11th edition. In brief, each citation in the text must be designated by a superscripted numeral, and full information must appear in the reference list. The reference list is to be double-spaced, arranged in the order the works are first cited, and numbered serially, with only 1 reference per number. Reference information must be accurate. References must be limited to directly pertinent published works or papers that have been accepted for publication. Number of references will vary by manuscript type and specific information can be seen below. For more information, a brief AMA tutorial for formatting references/citations can be downloaded here.

Figures and Tables

The maximum number of figures and/or tables is six. Additional figures or tables, if necessary, should be provided as supplemental Material. Figures and tables should be professional in appearance and have clean, crisp lines. Figures may not exceed 8 in × 10 in (20.3 cm × 25.4 cm), but may require reduction in size to fit the journal's format. Hand drawing and hand lettering are not acceptable. Use black and white or gray shading only, no color. Submit images as separate files that are either JPEG or TIFF format with a minimum resolution of 300 dots per inch (dpi). Tables should be formatted using the table function of of your word processing program rather than aligning columns in text with tabs and spaces or using text boxes. Authors are urged to submit figures rather than tables, when possible. Each table and figure must be on its own page, at the end of the manuscript. Tables should include a brief title and figures should include a descriptive legend. Both tables and figures should include a footnote section that provides expansions for abbreviated terms as well as notation for symbols used in the table. If P-value significance should be listed, please be sure to include the level of significance (e.g., P < .05). Information presented in figures and tables should not duplicate the text. Each table or figure should be cited in the text with a callout (e.g., "see Table 1").

Video

Video clips may be submitted to illustrate your article in the online version of JSR. Videos are encouraged because they allow for elaboration of techniques, testing procedures, or clinical observations. Replication of the figures in the text is not recommended. Files may be submitted for review as part of the manuscript; each digital video file should be designated and uploaded as a “supplementary file.” You also should indicate in the cover letter accompanying your submission that you have submitted a video file. Digital material from a source not original to the author must be accompanied by a statement from the copyright holder giving you permission to publish it; the source and copyright holder must be credited in the article. Video must be submitted in MPEG-4 (.mp4), Quicktime (.m4v, .mov), or Windows Media (.wmv) format with standard frame sizes of 1920 × 1080 pixels (for high definition) or 720 × 480 pixels (for standard definition) and a frame rate of 30 frames/s. Human Kinetics will inspect all video submissions for quality and technical specifications, and we reserve the right to reject any video submission that does not meet quality standards and specifications.

Guidelines for Manuscript Types

Original Research

Original research manuscripts must be limited to a 300 word abstract, 4,000 words within the main body (excluding the abstract, references, tables, and figure legends), a total of 6 figures/tables, and 30 references. Original research manuscripts must include the following sections: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions. A description of each section is below.

Abstract. The abstract may not exceed 300 words and must include the following headings: Context, Design, Methods, Results, and Conclusions.

Introduction. In this section, build the problem using relevant evidence and specifically state the purpose and hypotheses of the study without comprehensively reviewing the existing literature. Do not label the introduction section.

Methods. This section should include the following subheadings:

  • Study Design: This section should include the independent and dependent variables.  If the study was a registered clinical trial, indicate “registration number XXX” and include the actual registration number in the Title Page file.  
  • Patients or Participants: This section should include pertinent sample demographics, inclusion and exclusion criteria, a statement that institutional ethics review board approval was granted [without indicating author’s affiliation], and a statement that patients or participants provided informed consent in the spirit of the Helsinki Declaration.
  • Procedures: This section should clearly and succinctly describe the steps taken and/or interventions. Outcome measures and the instrumentation used to capture data should also be described in detail, with associated measurement properties.
  • Statistical Analyses: This section should clearly outline the analytic approach used to test the a priori hypotheses.

Results. This section should include a presentation of results relevant to the stated objectives. Authors are encouraged to use figures and tables when possible, as opposed to text, to summarize the results. If figures and tables are used, the information should not be repeated in the text. Most importantly, at the conclusion of the results section, including figures and tables, readers should understand the direction and magnitude of changes and/or differences. Thus, authors are encouraged to provide metrics (e.g. means differences with confidence intervals, effect sizes with confidence intervals, etc.) in addition to exact P-values. The text of this section should not explain why the results turned out as they did or justify the use of a specific statistical procedure. Text in this section should also have a focus on the results as opposed to the statistical analysis used.  

Discussion. The discussion is a formal consideration and critical examination of the study. The research hypotheses of the study should be addressed and considered in the context of other published works. The study’s limitations and generalizability should also be addressed. The final paragraph should outline the clinical implications of the study results in the context of the overall literature.

Conclusions. This section should summarize the most pertinent findings of the study. Conclusions should be directly supported by the data and should highlight the importance of the work that was performed while avoiding overgeneralizations.

Acknowledgments* (if applicable)

Conflict of interest* (if applicable)

References

Appendices (if applicable)

* Refer to Manuscript Blinding and Title Page sections above.

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

These manuscripts are systematic, critical assessments of literature and data sources pertaining to clinical topics, usually initiated with a specific clinical question(s) that are within the scope of the JSR mission. All articles or data sources should be systematically selected for inclusion and critically evaluated, and the search and selection process should be described in detail in the manuscript, with the number of results obtained at each step (eg. PRISMA diagram). The specific type of study or analysis, population, intervention, exposure, and tests or outcomes should be described for each article or data source.

The data sources should be as current as possible, ideally with the updated search having been conducted within 3 months of manuscript initial submission. If a manuscript is invited to be revised and resubmitted for further review, the search must be repeated and results updated prior to the resubmission. A 300 word maximum structured abstract is required and the recommended body of the manuscript is limited to ~4,000 words (excluding the abstract, tables, figures, and references).

Authors of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials are required to submit the PRISMA flow diagram and checklist. Please see Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. BMJ 2009;339:b2535, doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535, or visit http://www.prisma-statement.org/

Authors of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies are required to submit the proposed MOOSE checklist. Please see Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA. 2000;283:2008–2012, or visit Equator Network.

Structured Abstract. The abstract may not exceed 300 words and must include the following headings:

  • Context: Succinctly explain the importance of the review questions
  • Objective(s): A precise statement of the primary clinical question addressed by the review followed by any secondary question(s)
  • Evidence Acquisition: Data sources, study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction
  • Evidence Synthesis: Data synthesis and results of quality assessment
  • Conclusion(s)

Context. In this section, provide background and justify the need for the review by clearly describing the problem for which evidence of effectiveness was sought. This section should conclude with the objectives, which includes the question(s) to be addressed by the review (hypotheses tested).

Methods. This section should include the following subheadings:

  • Design: Discuss whether prospective registration of the SR/MA was sought (eg. PROSPERO, Cochrane Collaboration) and which reporting guideline was used (eg. PRISMA, MOOSE). Describe the design as a systematic review or systematic review with meta-analysis.
  • Evidence acquisition: Explain how the research was conducted and should detail data sources, search strategy, study selection (inclusion and exclusion criteria), data extraction, quality assessment, risk of bias, and data analysis. The details of the study selection process should be reported explicitly, preferably using a flow diagram. A list of studies excluded from the review should also be reported, where possible, giving the reasons for each exclusion. Study quality assessment and data extraction should also be addressed.
  • Evidence synthesis: Detail the included and excluded studies including the results of the review, including results of the quality assessment and risk of bias analysis. Discuss findings of the review, such as inclusion of the point measures and the measures of variability, is encouraged. For example, 95% confidence intervals should be incorporated around the calculation of effect sizes, odds ratios, relative risk, numbers needed to treat, and sensitivity and specificity. Robustness of the results (sensitivity analyses) should be addressed.

Discussion. Interpretation of the results and integration of findings into the body of evidence. Discuss the limitations of the systematic review process.

Conclusions. Provide recommendations for health care implications for further research and strength of recommendation.

Acknowledgments* (if applicable)

Conflict of interest* (if applicable)

References

Appendices (if applicable)

* Refer to Manuscript Blinding and Title Page sections above.

Critically Appraised Topics (CATs)

These manuscripts are a shorter summary of available evidence focused on a specific clinical question in sport rehabilitation. A critically appraised topic (CAT) is similar to a systematic review in that it summarizes the best evidence in a body of literature; however, it is intended to answer a focused clinical question for topics on which a clinical recommendation is needed, with emerging or limited evidence. CATs provide an excellent mechanism for busy evidence-based practice clinicians to collect and disseminate information they find while searching for answers to important clinical questions. A CAT is typically written when the results of a search include 3-5 high quality studies. If the search results in more than 5 studies, to answer that clinical question, a systematic review is more appropriate. Conversely, a summary of a single paper is referred to as a Critically Appraised Paper (CAP) (Note: JSR is not accepting CAPs for review.) A CAT seeks to find the best available evidence that is more readily available to clinicians, and then critically appraise the papers selected for inclusion using accepted standards for evidence-based practice. Examples of published CATs can be accessed on JSR’s website within each issue.
     
Structured Abstract. Structured abstracts should provide the following key information in one page or less.

  • Clinical Scenario: A brief description of the clinical scenario leading to the clinical question
  • Clinical Question: A focused clinical question of importance in sport rehabilitation
  • Summary of Key Findings: A bulleted list of the key clinical findings from the search
  • Clinical Bottom Line: The most important take-home message from the available evidence; a statement regarding the level of available evidence and subsequent strength of recommendations is required
  • Strength of Recommendation: A brief description of the strength of evidence summarized following the critical appraisal

Clinical Scenario. A brief description of background information that demonstrates need and clinical relevance for the focused clinical question. This section should be approximately 2-4 paragraphs.

Focused Clinical Question. The focused clinical question should be developed and presented using the PICO format [Patient/Client and Condition; Intervention (or Assessment); Comparison; Outcome(s)].

Search Strategy and Criteria. Clearly describe the process used to search for and include evidence to answer the focused clinical question.

  • Search Strategy: Include the databases and sites searched, the search terms used, search limits, and timeframe of search. The search should ideally be conducted within 3 months of submission for publication and should seek to obtain the best available evidence.
  • Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria: Describe the criteria for selection - the processes through which studies were selected for inclusion for further analysis.

Evidence of Quality Assessment. Describe the quality assessment scale used to appraise the quality of the evidence in the included studies

Summary of Search and Key Findings. In narrative form, describe the results of your search.

Results of Quality Assessment from Best Available Evidence. Describe the sources of evidence used, including the reasons the studies were selected (level of evidence, strengths and weaknesses related to issues of validity, and quality assessment scale results. Authors are encouraged to use the Center for Evidence-Based Medicine (2011) definitions for level of evidence (https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/).

Summary of Best Evidence (Table). This summary of included evidence is a comparative presentation that must be presented in a table. The table headings/rows must include citation, study design, participants, inclusion/exclusion criteria, intervention investigated, outcome measures, results, level of evidence, quality assessment score, and contribution to CAT question. The contribution to CAT question should be the CAT authors’ rating of how the study answers the focused clinical question. A numerical score should be used to rate the contribution to answering the question based on results and quality, such that 1 is no contribution, 3 is an inconclusive contribution, and 5 is a conclusive contribution.

Clinical Bottom Line. This section includes the following:

  • Strength of Recommendation: Provide the strength of recommendation based on the collective findings of the CAT by taking into account the individual studies’ level of evidence and the number, consistency, and coherence of the evidence as a whole. Authors must use the following text and insert the appropriate grade: “Collectively, the body of evidence included to answer the clinical question aligns with the strength of recommendation of [insert: A, B, C].”
  • Answer to Clinical Question: Describe the clinical bottom line that answers the proposed clinical question using the appraised evidence.

 Implications for Practice, Education, and Future Research. Include a practical discussion based on the information provided from the appraisal of current literature. Anecdotal comments regarding whether or not this intervention is commonly used clinically, the cost of this intervention, and so on are appropriate.

Acknowledgments* (if applicable)

Conflict of interest* (if applicable)

References

Appendices (if applicable)

* Refer to Manuscript Blinding and Title Page sections above.

Case Studies / Case Series

Case studies/series are descriptions of clinically relevant topics applied in practice that integrate clinical-decision making, available evidence, and outcomes used in the management of a patient case. Case studies/series must be within the scope of the JSR mission. Case study/series manuscripts should be limited to a 300 word abstract, 2,500 words within the main body (excluding the abstract, tables, references, and figure legends), 6 total tables/figures, and 20 references. Please note that Case Studies/Series will be indexed and go through peer-review like all other submissions but will only be published online.

Abstract. This section must include the following headings: Context, Case Presentation, Management and Outcomes, and Conclusions.

Introduction. This section should describe background information to support the clinical relevance of the case to sport rehabilitation. Important concepts that relate to the case presentation, management, and outcomes presented in the manuscript can be included in this section.

Case Presentation. This section should be a concise description of the case, including relevant patient history, case presentation, and clinical reasoning only to the extent it relates to and impacts the management of the case. The reader should have sufficient information to understand the clinical reasoning based on final diagnosis for the management presented in the next section.

Management and Outcomes. This section should detail the patient care provided. Surgical and non-surgical (pharmacological, therapy/rehabilitation, supportive devices, etc.) interventions should be described and include specific rehabilitation parameters, clinical and patient-reported outcomes must be used to show progress and results, and short- and long-term follow-up. Authors are encouraged to consider including figures and videos to demonstrate unique interventions that will enhance understanding and clinical application by readers.

Discussion. This section should include a brief literature review describe underlying factors of the pathology/injury presented, provide clinical reasoning and integration of practice guidelines and recommendations used in decision-making, and a description of the patient’s response, perspective, and experience related to the care provided and resulting outcomes.

Conclusions. This section should focus on clinically relevant conclusions and recommendations that clinicians can translate into their own practice based on what was learned in this patient case study/series.

Acknowledgments* (if applicable)

Conflict of interest* (if applicable)

References

Appendices (if applicable)

* Refer to Manuscript Blinding and Title Page sections above.

Technical Reports

Technical Reports are short articles that present results within the scope of the JSR mission. Results can be related to a new or modified method, instrument, or clinical technique; validity/reliability or methods; or an important experimental observation. This format is focused on providing concise reports of experimental investigations with the intent of providing the readership with innovative original findings in regard to clinical and laboratory techniques or observations.

Technical Report manuscripts should be limited to a 300 word abstract, 2,500 words within the main body (excluding the abstract, tables, references, and figure legends), 6 total tables/figures, and 20 references. Please note that Technical Reports will be indexed and go through peer-review like all other submissions but will only be published online. Examples of published Technical Reports can be accessed on JSR’s website within each issue.

Technical Reports must include the following parts: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions. Further details on each section are below.

Abstract. This section must include the following headings: Context, Design, Methods, Results, and Conclusions.

Introduction. This section should very concisely build the problem. Given word counts and methodological details needed, the introduction should focus on the larger context and only include the most pertinent details. This section must also specifically state the purpose and hypotheses of the study. Do not label the introduction section.

Methods. This section should be as detailed as possible within the word count constraints and include the following subheadings:

  • Study Design: This section should include the independent and dependent variables.
  • Patients or Participants: This section should include pertinent demographics, a statement that institutional ethics review board approval was granted [without indicating author’s affiliation], and a statement that participants/patients provided informed consent in the spirit of the Helsinki Declaration.
  • Procedures: This section should clearly and succinctly describe steps taken and/or interventions. Intervention descriptions can also be provided in tabular format. If such a table is very large, authors will likely be asked to reduce the total number of tables/figures associated with their submission. Outcome measures and the instrumentation used to capture them should also be described in detail.
  • Statistical Analyses: This section should clearly outline the analytic approach used to test the a priori hypotheses.

Results. This section should include a presentation of results relevant to the stated objectives. Authors are encouraged to use tables and figures when possible, as opposed to text, to summarize the results. If tables or figures are used, the information should not be repeated in the text. Most importantly, at the conclusion of the results section, including tables and figures, readers should understand the direction and magnitude of changes and/or differences. Thus, authors are encouraged to provide metrics (e.g. means differences with confidence intervals, effect sizes with confidence intervals, etc.) in additional to P-values. The text of this section should not explain why the results turned out as they did or justify the use of a specific statistical procedure. Text in this section should also have a focus on the results as opposed to the statistical analysis run. 

Discussion. The discussion is a formal consideration and critical examination of the study. The research hypotheses of the study should be addressed and considered in the context of other published works. The study’s limitations and generalizability should also be addressed. The final paragraph should outline the clinical implications of the study results in the context of the overall literature.

Conclusions. This section should summarize the most pertinent findings of the study. Conclusions should be directly supported by the data and should highlight the importance of the work that was performed while avoiding overgeneralizations.

Acknowledgments* (if applicable)

Conflict of interest* (if applicable)

References

Appendices (if applicable)

* Refer to Manuscript Blinding and Title Page sections above.

Submitting a Manuscript

The Journal of Sport Rehabilitation uses a web-based system, ScholarOne, for the submission and tracking of manuscripts (see submission button at the top of this page). Submissions undergo a peer-review process; submissions are read by the editor and at least two reviewers through a blind review process. The time between submission and a decision regarding acceptance for publication takes approximately 7–10 weeks, but may be longer. Submitted manuscripts may not be in the review process by any other publication when, or during review, by the Journal of Sport Rehabilitation.

Authors of manuscripts accepted for publication must transfer copyright to Human Kinetics, Inc. To view this form, please visit ScholarOne and select "Instructions & Forms" in the upper right corner. You do not need an account to access this information. 

Individuals

Online Subscriptions

Individuals may purchase online-only subscriptions directly from this website. To order, click on an article and select the subscription option you desire for the journal of interest (individual or student, 1-year or 2-year), and then click Buy. Those purchasing student subscriptions must be prepared to provide proof of student status as a degree-seeking candidate at an accredited institution. Online-only subscriptions purchased via this website provide immediate access to all the journal's content, including all archives and Ahead of Print. Note that a subscription does not allow access to all the articles on this website, but only to those articles published in the journal you subscribe to. For step-by-step instructions to purchase online, click here.

Print + Online Subscriptions

Individuals wishing to purchase a subscription with a print component (print + online) must contact our customer service team directly to place the order. Click here to contact us!

Institutions

Institution subscriptions must be placed directly with our customer service team. To review format options and pricing, visit our Librarian Resource Center. To place your order, contact us

Follow @JSportRehab  

Most Popular