SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Applications of natural language processing and large language models in sports injury assessment and rehabilitation decision-making: a scoping review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to provide a scoping review of the current applications of natural language processing (NLP) and large language models (LLMs) in the assessment of sports injuries and rehabilitation decision-making, with the goal of identifying the technical methods, data sources, target populations, key findings, and knowledge gaps in existing research, and to provide evidence-based guidance for clinical practice. Methods: We followed the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scoping review framework and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines to search the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases (up to March 31, 2026). We included studies on sports injury and rehabilitation that utilized NLP or LLMs to process unstructured text. Two researchers independently screened the studies and extracted data; disagreements were resolved through discussion or third-party arbitration. Study quality was assessed using MINimum Information for Medical AI Reporting (MINIMAR). Results: A total of 27 studies were included. The majority of the studies originated from the United States (37.0%). The primary research types were algorithm evaluation and benchmarking. Healthcare professionals were the main target population. The text data sources consisted primarily of simulated/synthetic question-answering scenarios. The included studies faced challenges such as readability issues and AI hallucinations. The overall compliance rate with the MINIMAR report quality assessment was 61.70%. Conclusion: LLMs have shown great potential as tools for sports injury assessment and rehabilitation decision-making. However, they still have significant shortcomings in terms of readability, hallucination control, patient perspective, methodological reporting, and geographic coverage. Future efforts should be grounded in the sports field, with a focus on athletes and team physicians, to improve model reliability, bridge geographic gaps, elevate research standards, and facilitate the transition from baseline assessment to clinical application.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.