@article{AppiahDwomohMuellerMayer2019,
  author    = {Appiah-Dwomoh, Edem Korkor and M{\"u}ller, Steffen and Mayer, Frank},
  title     = {Is there an association between variables of static and dynamic postural control in adolescent athletes with back pain?},
  series = {German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research},
  volume    = {49},
  journal   = {German Journal of Exercise and Sport Research},
  number    = {2},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {New York},
  issn      = {2509-3142},
  doi       = {10.1007/s12662-019-00573-6},
  pages     = {150 -- 155},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {An association between static and dynamic postural control exists in adults with back pain. We aimed to determine whether this association also exists in adolescent athletes with the same condition. In all, 128 athletes with and without back pain performed three measurements of 15s of static (one-legged stance) and dynamic (star excursion balance test) postural control tests. All subjects and amatched subgroup of athletes with and without back pain were analyzed. The smallest center of pressure mediolateral and anterior-posterior displacements (mm) and normalized highest reach distance were the outcome measures. No association was found between variables of the static and dynamic tests for all subjects and the matched group with and without back pain. The control of static and dynamic posture in adolescent athletes with and without back pain might not be related.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BuschKlausSchaeferetal.2019,
  author    = {Busch, Verena and Klaus, Valentin Helmut and Schaefer, Deborah and Prati, Daniel and Boch, Steffen and M{\"u}ller, J{\"o}rg and Chiste, Melanie and Mody, Karsten and Bl{\"u}thgen, Nico and Fischer, Markus and H{\"o}lzel, Norbert and Kleinebecker, Till},
  title     = {Will I stay or will I go? Plant species-specific response and tolerance to high land-use intensity in temperate grassland ecosystems},
  series = {Journal of vegetation science},
  volume    = {30},
  journal   = {Journal of vegetation science},
  number    = {4},
  publisher = {Wiley},
  address   = {Hoboken},
  issn      = {1100-9233},
  doi       = {10.1111/jvs.12749},
  pages     = {674 -- 686},
  year      = {2019},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{PlummerMugeleSteffenetal.2019,
  author    = {Plummer, Ashley and Mugele, Hendrik and Steffen, Kathrin and Stoll, Josefine and Mayer, Frank and M{\"u}ller, Juliane},
  title     = {General versus sports-specific injury prevention programs in athletes},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {591},
  issn      = {1866-8364},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-44113},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-441131},
  pages     = {17},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Introduction Injury prevention programs (IPPs) are an inherent part of training in recreational and professional sports. Providing performance-enhancing benefits in addition to injury prevention may help adjust coaches and athletes' attitudes towards implementation of injury prevention into daily routine. Conventional thinking by players and coaches alike seems to suggest that IPPs need to be specific to one's sport to allow for performance enhancement. The systematic literature review aims to firstly determine the IPPs nature of exercises and whether they are specific to the sport or based on general conditioning. Secondly, can they demonstrate whether general, sports-specific or even mixed IPPs improve key performance indicators with the aim to better facilitate long-term implementation of these programs? Methods PubMed and Web of Science were electronically searched throughout March 2018. The inclusion criteria were randomized control trials, publication dates between Jan 2006 and Feb 2018, athletes (11-45 years), injury prevention programs and included predefined performance measures that could be categorized into balance, power, strength, speed/agility and endurance. The methodological quality of included articles was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration assessment tools. Results Of 6619 initial findings, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition, reference lists unearthed a further 6 studies, making a total of 28. Nine studies used sports specific IPPs, eleven general and eight mixed prevention strategies. Overall, general programs ranged from 29-57\% in their effectiveness across performance outcomes. Mixed IPPs improved in 80\% balance outcomes but only 20-44\% in others. Sports-specific programs led to larger scale improvements in balance (66\%), power (83\%), strength (75\%), and speed/agility (62\%). Conclusion Sports-specific IPPs have the strongest influence on most performance indices based on the significant improvement versus control groups. Other factors such as intensity, technical execution and compliance should be accounted for in future investigations in addition to exercise modality.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{PlummerMugeleSteffenetal.2019,
  author    = {Plummer, Ashley and Mugele, Hendrik and Steffen, Kathrin and Stoll, Josefine and Mayer, Frank and M{\"u}ller, Juliane},
  title     = {General versus sports-specific injury prevention programs in athletes},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {14},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {8},
  publisher = {PLOS 1},
  address   = {San Francisco},
  issn      = {1932-6203},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0221346},
  pages     = {15},
  year      = {2019},
  abstract  = {Introduction Injury prevention programs (IPPs) are an inherent part of training in recreational and professional sports. Providing performance-enhancing benefits in addition to injury prevention may help adjust coaches and athletes' attitudes towards implementation of injury prevention into daily routine. Conventional thinking by players and coaches alike seems to suggest that IPPs need to be specific to one's sport to allow for performance enhancement. The systematic literature review aims to firstly determine the IPPs nature of exercises and whether they are specific to the sport or based on general conditioning. Secondly, can they demonstrate whether general, sports-specific or even mixed IPPs improve key performance indicators with the aim to better facilitate long-term implementation of these programs? Methods PubMed and Web of Science were electronically searched throughout March 2018. The inclusion criteria were randomized control trials, publication dates between Jan 2006 and Feb 2018, athletes (11-45 years), injury prevention programs and included predefined performance measures that could be categorized into balance, power, strength, speed/agility and endurance. The methodological quality of included articles was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration assessment tools. Results Of 6619 initial findings, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition, reference lists unearthed a further 6 studies, making a total of 28. Nine studies used sports specific IPPs, eleven general and eight mixed prevention strategies. Overall, general programs ranged from 29-57\% in their effectiveness across performance outcomes. Mixed IPPs improved in 80\% balance outcomes but only 20-44\% in others. Sports-specific programs led to larger scale improvements in balance (66\%), power (83\%), strength (75\%), and speed/agility (62\%). Conclusion Sports-specific IPPs have the strongest influence on most performance indices based on the significant improvement versus control groups. Other factors such as intensity, technical execution and compliance should be accounted for in future investigations in addition to exercise modality.},
  language  = {en}
}