← All months

September 2025 6 materials

How to calculate reliability

Every study gets a score from 1 to 10 for the reliability of its conclusions. The score depends on:

  • Publication type. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of RCTs score highest. Individual RCTs and cohort studies come lower. Preprints (bioRxiv, medRxiv) score even lower due to a lack of peer review.
  • Sample size. A study with 10,000+ participants is more reliable than a pilot study with 14.
  • Journal and peer review. Publication in an impact-factor journal is not the same as a preprint.
  • Methodology. Control groups, randomisation, blinding, duration of follow-up.
  • Conflict of interest and funding. Declared and transparent — a plus.

The score is generated by AI from publication metadata. It is a Guide, not a verdict — even a 6/10 can contain an important result, and 9/10 doesn't exempt you from reading critically. Every source is signed: click "Read research →" to verify for yourself.

PubMed
Research in Sports Medicine (Print)
29 September
Reliability: 9/10 Reliability is the assessment of how confident we are in the study's conclusion. It accounts for publication type (RCT > cohort > case series > preprint), sample size, journal, and methodology. 9–10: strong evidence. 7–8: confident with caveats. 5–6: preliminary, needs confirmation. The score is generated by AI from publication metadata.

Lumbar spine injuries among competitive swimmers aged high school and college, associated with various training methods and stroke specialities.

Schwartz, A, Richards, L, Labrador, H, et al.

English summary coming soon.

Swimming Spinal injuries training load Prevention
Read research
DOI: 10.1080/15438627.2025.2567352
PubMed
Journal of bodywork and movement therapies
26 September
Reliability: 9/10 Reliability is the assessment of how confident we are in the study's conclusion. It accounts for publication type (RCT > cohort > case series > preprint), sample size, journal, and methodology. 9–10: strong evidence. 7–8: confident with caveats. 5–6: preliminary, needs confirmation. The score is generated by AI from publication metadata.

A study investigating the impact of the 'rehabilitation-training integration' intervention strategy on elite weightlifters with chronic low back pain returning to competitive sports.

Liu, P., Yan, Q

English summary coming soon.

Chronic back pain Rehabilitation Weightlifting Kinetic chain Return to sport
Read research
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2025.09.022
PubMed
Journal of Ageing and Physical Activity
19 September
Reliability: 7/10 Reliability is the assessment of how confident we are in the study's conclusion. It accounts for publication type (RCT > cohort > case series > preprint), sample size, journal, and methodology. 9–10: strong evidence. 7–8: confident with caveats. 5–6: preliminary, needs confirmation. The score is generated by AI from publication metadata.

Refining and Implementing a Vigorous Intermittent Lifestyle Physical Activity Intervention: Views of Key Stakeholders.

Pang, B, Moullin, JC, McVeigh, JA, et al.

English summary coming soon.

Physical activity Elderly Interval training Lifestyle motivation
Read research
DOI: 10.1123/japa.2024-0126
PubMed
Research in Sports Medicine (Print)
14 Sep
Reliability: 7/10 Reliability is the assessment of how confident we are in the study's conclusion. It accounts for publication type (RCT > cohort > case series > preprint), sample size, journal, and methodology. 9–10: strong evidence. 7–8: confident with caveats. 5–6: preliminary, needs confirmation. The score is generated by AI from publication metadata.

Trends and views on non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use among ultra-endurance runners.

Cole, PL, Bontemps, B, Pugh, J, et al.

English summary coming soon.

additives UNPZ ultramarathon Pain management
Read research
DOI: 10.1080/15438627.2025.2561040
PubMed
Perceptual and motor skills
6 September
Reliability: 8/10 Reliability is the assessment of how confident we are in the study's conclusion. It accounts for publication type (RCT > cohort > case series > preprint), sample size, journal, and methodology. 9–10: strong evidence. 7–8: confident with caveats. 5–6: preliminary, needs confirmation. The score is generated by AI from publication metadata.

Sex-Based Differences in Acute Physiological and Psychological Responses to a Classical HIFT Tabata Protocol Modified with Short Efforts.

Ferraro-Farro, D, Trujillo-Baameiro, D, Alberton, CL, et al.

English summary coming soon.

HIIT Tabata gender differences Cardio training Functional training
Read research
DOI: 10.1177/00315125251376390
PubMed
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy: Official Journal of the ESSKA
4 September
Reliability: 7/10 Reliability is the assessment of how confident we are in the study's conclusion. It accounts for publication type (RCT > cohort > case series > preprint), sample size, journal, and methodology. 9–10: strong evidence. 7–8: confident with caveats. 5–6: preliminary, needs confirmation. The score is generated by AI from publication metadata.

Thresholds for minimum clinically important difference, minimal important change and patient acceptable symptom state for the ACL-RSI and the K-SES in patients after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

Piussi, R, Lindskog, J, Hamrin Senorski, R, et al.

English summary coming soon.

Rehabilitation Return to sport Knee injuries Self-efficacy
Read research
DOI: 10.1002/ksa.70044