机器学习
可解释性
人工智能
接收机工作特性
随机森林
运动员
预测建模
计算机科学
集成学习
特征选择
纳入和排除标准
系统回顾
决策树
特征(语言学)
支持向量机
学习曲线
集合预报
风险评估
统计分类
心理学
预测效度
包裹体(矿物)
毒物控制
作者
Jin Yuan,Zhuojia Li,Q. Zeng,Jun Li,Anjie WANG,Y Zhang,Fei Xu
出处
期刊:Digital health
[SAGE]
日期:2026-01-01
卷期号:12: 20552076251408523-20552076251408523
标识
DOI:10.1177/20552076251408523
摘要
Objective This study aims to systematically review the current literature on the application of machine learning to predict return-to-sport (RTS) decisions after athletic injuries. The review focuses on identifying the types of machine learning models used, the commonly used predictive variables, and the methodological characteristics and limitations between studies in terms of design, model development, evaluation, and reporting. Method A comprehensive literature search was conducted on 1 May 2025 in three electronic databases: Web of Science, PubMed, and SPORTDiscus (EBSCO). Two independent reviewers selected the retrieved studies based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST) was used to assess the risk of bias in the included prognostic modeling studies. Results Of the 56 studies initially identified, 11 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Knee injuries were the most frequently modeled injury type for RTS decision-making (n = 4). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC AUC) was the most commonly reported performance metric, presented in 82% of the included studies. Random Forest (RF) was the most widely used machine learning algorithm, applied in six studies (55%), and demonstrated the best predictive performance in four of them, with two studies reporting an AUC greater than 0.9. Some studies employed feature importance analysis or interpretability methods (e.g. SHAP) to identify key predictive variables. However, challenges remain in translating these models into clinical practice. Conclusions Machine learning techniques demonstrate promising potential for predicting RTS in athletes. Nevertheless, substantial heterogeneity across studies—particularly in RTS definitions, feature selection, and model development which limits the generalizability and clinical applicability of current models.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI