• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine >Relationship Between Pitching a Complete Game and Spending Time on the Disabled List for Major League Baseball Pitchers: Letter to the Editor
【24h】

Relationship Between Pitching a Complete Game and Spending Time on the Disabled List for Major League Baseball Pitchers: Letter to the Editor

机译：投全场比赛与美国职业棒球大联盟投手在残疾人名单上花费时间之间的关系：致编辑

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Dear Editor: In the March 2018 issue of the Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine , Erickson et al ~( 2 ) sought to “determine the relationship between pitching a [complete game] (CG) and time on the [disabled list] (DL)” in baseball. They hypothesized that pitchers who threw a full 9-inning game would be at greater risk for injury than those who did not. They concluded that “74% of pitchers who threw a CG spent time on the DL, as compared with 20% of controls.” Their article does not support this, however. The 74% figure is derived from 501 pitcher-seasons from 246 pitchers who threw at least 1 CG from 2010 to 2016, 370 of which included a DL trip. To create a proper comparison group, the authors attempted to match this CG group to pitchers of a similar age and with a similar number of innings pitched (IP) in the season that the CG players threw their CG (the “index season”), but they were unable to do so. Instead, they found matched controls for a subgroup of 92 CG pitchers who went on the DL (CG/DL group). This is problematic for 2 reasons. First, we cannot make a comparison of DL risk between these controls and the CG/DL group, who by definition have a 100% risk of a DL trip. Second, matching on season IP also introduces selection on the dependent variable ~( 3 ): CG pitchers likely tended to throw deeper into games, so obtaining a control group with similar IP is difficult unless they threw in more games, for example, by not going on the DL. This could bias the DL risk in the control group downward. Even if we set aside these concerns, among the controls, the authors found that 50%, rather than 20%, spent time on the DL at some point during the study period. We are not told the corresponding proportion of pitcher-seasons, but given that prior injuries are a risk factor for future injuries, ~( 1 ) it is possible that this is higher. The 20% figure was the proportion of controls who spent time on the DL during the index season specifically. Thus, the 74% vs 20% comparison is invalid for several reasons: It mistakenly equates pitcher-seasons with pitchers, compares a risk over the entire study period with a 1-year risk, and uses a control group that is selected on the dependent variable. Baseball organizations should not use this study as evidence that throwing a CG places pitchers at greater risk for injury. Zachary O. Binney, PhD, MPH Atlanta, Georgia, USA
机译：尊敬的编辑：在《运动医学骨科学》杂志2018年3月号中，Erickson等人（2）试图“确定投掷[完整游戏]（CG）与[残疾名单]（DL）上的时间之间的关系。 ”。他们假设投掷整整9局比赛的投手比没有投篮的投手受伤的风险更大。他们得出的结论是：“投​​掷CG的投手中有74％在DL上花费了时间，而对照组则为20％。”但是，他们的文章不支持这一点。 74％的数字来自246个投手的501个投手赛季，这些投手从2010年至2016年投掷了至少1 CG，其中370个包含了DL之旅。为了创建一个合适的比较组，作者尝试将这个CG组与年龄相似且在CG玩家投掷CG的季节（IP）投掷相似局数（IP）的投手相匹配，但他们无法做到。相反，他们为参加DL的92个CG投手子组（CG / DL组）找到了匹配的对照。这有两个原因。首先，我们无法对这些对照组和CG / DL组之间的DL风险进行比较，根据定义，CG / DL组的DL旅行风险为100％。其次，按季节IP进行匹配还会引入因变量〜（3）的选择：CG投手可能倾向于更深入地投入比赛，因此，除非他们投入更多的比赛，否则很难获得IP相似的对照组，例如，在DL上。这可能会使对照组的DL风险降低。即使我们排除了这些担忧，在控件中，作者发现在研究期间的某个时候，有50％而不是20％的时间花在了DL上。我们没有被告知投手季节的相应比例，但是鉴于先前的受伤是将来受伤的危险因素，〜（1）可能更高。 20％的数字是专门在索引季节花费在DL上的控件的比例。因此，74％和20％的比较是无效的，原因有以下几个：错误地将投手季节与投手等同起来，将整个研究期间的风险与1年风险进行比较，并使用根据受抚养人选择的对照组变量。棒球组织不应该以这项研究为证据，证明投掷CG会使投手受伤的风险更大。 Zachary O.Binney博士，MPH美国佐治亚州亚特兰大市

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号