Fresh science! New review of 17 “mostly low quality” studies of the relationship between leg injuries and movement quality shows “inconsistent evidence.” In other words, we have no idea if we can tell who’s going to get leghurt based on screening people for quality-of-movement trouble, e.g. Functional Movement Screen.
I’m always torn about how to interpret these garbage-in, garbage-out reviews: they’re officially inconclusive, because they are obviously reviewing studies that just weren’t designed to answer the damn question. But realistically … they are really just totally damning, because if a bunch of high-bias-risk studies can’t demonstrate the link the researchers are undoubtedly fishing for, then it almost certainly ain’t there. Seriously, how many crappy little studies showing not much do we need before it’s safe to assume that there’s no beef? 4? 7? 17?