Prediction of Injuries in CrossFit Training: A Machine Learning Perspective

CrossFit has gained recognition and interest among physically active populations being one of the most popular and rapidly growing exercise regimens worldwide. Due to the intense and repetitive nature of CrossFit, concerns have been raised over the potential injury risks that are associated with its training including rhabdomyolysis and musculoskeletal injuries. However, identification of risk factors for predicting injuries in CrossFit athletes has been limited by the absence of relevant big epidemiological studies. The main purpose of this paper is the identification of risk factors and the development of machine learning-based models using ensemble learning that can predict CrossFit injuries. To accomplish the aforementioned targets, a survey-based epidemiological study was conducted in Greece to collect data on musculoskeletal injuries in CrossFit practitioners. A Machine Learning (ML) pipeline was then implemented that involved data pre-processing, feature selection and well-known ML models. The performance of the proposed ML models was assessed using a comprehensive cross validation mechanism whereas a discussion on the nature of the selected features is also provided. An area under the curve (AUC) of 77.93% was achieved by the best ML model using ensemble learning (Adaboost) on the group of six selected risk factors. The effectiveness of the proposed approach was evaluated in a comparative analysis with respect to numerous performance metrics including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, AUC and confusion matrices to confirm its clinical relevance. The results are the basis for the development of reliable tools for the prediction of injuries in CrossFit

Epidemiological Profile among Greek CrossFit Practitioners

CrossFit (CF) is a popular and rapidly expanding training program in Greece and worldwide. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence on the risk of musculoskeletal injuries related to CF in the Greek population. A self-administered survey of 1224 Greek CF practitioners aged 18 to 59 was conducted and analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The highest percentage of the participants (34%) practiced 5 days per week for 60 min (42.2%) and had 2 days per week of rest (41.7%). A total of 273 individuals (23%) participated in CF competitions and 948 (77%) did not. The results showed that the most common injuries were muscle injuries (51.3%), followed by tendinopathies (49.6%) and joint injuries (26.6%). The shoulders (56.6%; n = 303), knees (31.8%; n = 170), and lumbar spine (33.1%; n = 177) were the most commonly injured locations. The logistic regression model showed that participation in competitions (p = 0.001), rest per week (p = 0.01), duration of training per session (p = 0.001), and frequency of training per week (p = 0.03) were statistically significant factors for injury. Training level was not a statistically significant factor for injury (p = 0.43). As CF continues to gain popularity on a global scale and the number of athletes gradually increases, it is important to monitor the safety of practitioners. Clinicians should consider participation in competitions, rest, training duration, and frequency in order to make CF safer

Topical prebiotics/postbiotics and PRURISCORE validation in atopic dermatitis. International study of 396 patients

Aim: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of a cream (Rilastil Xerolact PB) containing a mixture of prebiotics and postbiotics, and to validate the PRURISCORE itch scale in the management of atopic dermatitis. Methods: The study is based on 396 subjects of both sexes in three age groups (i.e., infants, children, adults) suffering from mild/moderate Atopic Dermatitis, recruited from 8 European countries and followed for 3 months. Results: The product demonstrated good efficacy combined with good/very good tolerability in all age groups. In particular, SCORAD, PRURISCORE and IGA scores decreased significantly over the course of the study. The PRURISCORE was preferred to VAS by the vast majority of patients. Conclusion: Even though the role of prebiotics and postbiotics was not formally demonstrated since these substances were part of a complex formulation, it can be reasonably stated that prebiotics and postbiotics have safety and standardization features that probiotics do not have. In addition they are authorized by regulatory authorities, whereas topical probiotics are not