There is a need for research to identify effective implementation strategies for injury prevention training within real‐world community sports. The aim of this ecological participatory study was to identify facilitators, among stakeholders at multiple levels, that could help injury prevention training become part of regular training routines in youth team handball. Concept mapping, a mixed‐method approach for qualitative data collection and quantitative data analysis, was used. Stakeholders (n = 196) of two community team handball clubs (29% players, 13% coaches, 38% caregivers, 11% club, district and national handball administrators, 9% unknown) participated in a brainstorming process. After the research team synthesized the 235 generated statements, 50 stakeholders (34% players, 22% coaches, 24% caregivers, 20% administrators) sorted 89 unique facilitator statements into clusters and rated them for importance and feasibility. Multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis yielded five clusters (stress value 0.231): “Understanding and applying knowledge,” “Education, knowledge, and consistency,” “Set‐up and exercises,” “Inspiration, motivation, and routines,” and “Club policy and expert collaboration.” The cluster “Understanding and applying knowledge” had the highest mean importance (3.17 out of 4) and feasibility (2.93) ratings. The 32 statements rated as both highly important and feasible (Go‐zone) indicate action is required at the individual (end‐users) and organizational (policymakers) levels to implement injury prevention training. Results suggest that developing evidence‐based context‐specific injury prevention training, incorporating physiological, biomechanical and psychological components, and an associated context‐specific implementation plan in partnership with all stakeholders should be a high priority to facilitate the implementation of injury prevention training in youth team handball.

Coaches are essential to participant safety, particularly by implementing injury prevention programs. The evidence-based injury prevention programs developed by sports scientists will not prevent injuries in real-world sports settings if they are not properly implemented. This study investigated the knowledge and use of the highly efficacious 11+ injury prevention program among coaches of adolescent, female football teams, in Victoria, Australia. A cross-sectional online survey based on the RE-AIM framework identified that nearly half (42%) of the 64 respondents (response rate = 36%) were not aware of the 11+, and only one-third (31%) reported using it. Three-quarters (74%) of the 19 respondents who reported on the 11+ components they used, did not use the entire program. Nearly half (44%) of the 18 respondents who reported the frequency with which they used the 11+, used it less than the recommended twice a week. Barriers to implementing the 11+ included: limited awareness of the 11+; lack of knowledge about how to implement it; not having time to implement it; and believing that the 11+ does not incorporate appropriate progression. This study suggests that it is unlikely that the 11+ prevents a significant number of injuries in real-world football settings due to the lack of awareness and use among coaches. Football-governing bodies should use evidence-based strategies to raise awareness of the 11+, build coach competency to implement it, and address time-related implementation barriers that coaches experience. Coaches should keep up-to-date with injury prevention research evidence and prioritize injury prevention at training, including allocating time to implement injury prevention programs properly.

Female, woman and/or girl athletes’ sport participation rates are rising and associated with high injury rates and burden. Using best-practice consensus methodology, we developed recommendations to guide injury prevention for female/woman/girl athletes. The Female/woman/girl Athlete Injury pRevention ( FAIR ) International Olympic Committee Consensus meeting was held from 31 March to 2 April 2025 (Lausanne, Switzerland). The FAIR Consensus followed an eight-step hybrid method. 109 authors from six continents conducted: (1) systematic reviews synthesising evidence on injury prevention strategies and modifiable risk factors for lower-extremity and upper-extremity injuries, concussions and spine/chest/abdominal/pelvic injuries/pain, (2) a scoping review synthesising dissemination and implementation (D&I) approaches; and (3) a concept mapping project generating knowledge on gender/sex-related factors for injury prevention. These projects underpinned draft recommendations subsequently voted on by a steering committee (n=24) and an external advisory committee chair over two anonymous survey rounds. Recommendations, Round 1 voting results and suggestions/dissenting comments were discussed between Round 1 and 2 voting. Consensus was defined as ‘critical to include’ (≥70% scored recommendation as 7–9 (9-point Likert scale, 1=not important; 9=critically important) AND ≤15% scored recommendation as 1–3). The 56 FAIR recommendations address: primary injury prevention (n=16) (policy/rules/laws=6; personal protective equipment=8; training=2); secondary injury prevention (n=4); modifiable risk factors (n=12); approaches to D&I (n=14); and promoting gender/sex-supportive environments (n=10). The FAIR Consensus informs evidence-based best practices and policy for injury prevention, approaches to implementation and creation of supportive environments for female/woman/girl athletes. Every person at all levels of sport can, and should, take responsibility for actions that positively influence female/woman/girl athlete health and safety.

Objective: This study aimed to gather and represent experts’ perspectives on the gender- and/or sex-specific factors relevant to injury risk for female/woman/girl athletes. Methods: Mixed-methods concept mapping study. Sixty-six experts including cisgendered (1) athlete/coach/carers, (2) clinicians, (3) sports science/high-performance professional, (4) administrators and (5) researchers brainstormed statements to a prompt (‘What gender-specific and/or sex-specific factors do you think contribute to injury risk among female, woman and girl athletes?’) before thematically sorting and rating the statements/factors for importance and modifiability (5-point Likert scales). Results: Ten clusters were constructed from 101 unique statements/factors. The clusters (number of statements) include: (1) Inequitable organisational funding and support (n=17); (2) Athletes’ lack of, and access to, resources (n=7); (3) Lack of knowledge and expertise among support staff (n=6); (4) Lack of evidence for, and implementation of gender and sex-appropriate injury prevention (n=20); (5) Sex-related factor s (n=14); (6) Gendered health (n=8); (7) Gendered expectations to conform to athletic ideals and norms (n=10); (8) Gendered harassment (interpersonal violence) and social biases (n=9); (9) Gendered sport environment (7); (10) Gendered communication (n=3). Lack of knowledge and expertise among support staff was deemed the most important and modifiable cluster to address gender- and/or sex-specific factors relevant to injury prevention for female/woman/girl athletes. Conclusion: Ten gender- and/or sex-specific clusters, ranging from organisational to biological considerations and societal influences, were defined that could impact female/woman/girl athlete injury risk factors. Advancing stronger evidence for gender and sex appropriate injury prevention is urgently needed.

This study investigates the challenges of returning to sport after a COVID-19 shutdown of sport from the perspective of community sport clubs (CSCs). We explore the relationship between the challen...