Computational methods to model complex systems in sports injury research: agent-based modelling (ABM) and systems dynamics (SD) modelling

‘Systems thinking’,1 2 complexity theory3 and the ‘complex systems approach’4–7 are gaining momentum among leading sports injury researchers. One reason for this is a growing recognition that traditional risk factor identification methods (eg, stepwise regression modelling) fail to reflect the complex mechanisms of sports injury causation.1 4 8 9 Effective sports injury prevention requires us to understand the complex relationships that occur among a ‘web of interacting determinants’,4 rather than try to isolate the causal effect of individual factors .1 To better understand sports injury mechanisms, researchers are exploring several different approaches. One of them—and the focus of this editorial—is using computational methods that have the potential to describe and simulate the complex and dynamic nature of sports injury causation and prevention in ‘complex systems’.1 4 5 7 The main characteristics of complex systems are described in table 1. These characteristics justify the use of two computational modelling approaches: agent-based modelling (ABM) and systems dynamics (SD) modelling. It is important to note that static modelling (eg, computer-based spreadsheets), differential equations, automata and process algebraic models, Bayesian networks, machine learning, neural networks, social network analysis and Monte Carlo methods are, unlike ABM and SD modelling, not able to model or simulate dynamic causal feedback among fundamentally different factors. Rather, predictive and simple statistical modelling, as well as mathematical algorithms that forecast the probability of future events, are useful for understanding certain aspects of complex systems at fixed time points and/or across one or more levels. These latter approaches are still computational in nature; however, they serve a purpose for a specific type of problem. We also alert the reader that the use of advanced statistical modelling to better understand the complex relationships between time-varying exposures (eg, training/match workloads) and sports injury development (eg, …

[1]  J. Forrester Industrial Dynamics , 1997 .

[2]  Paul M. Salmon,et al.  Closing Pandora's Box: adapting a systems ergonomics methodology for better understanding the ecological complexity underpinning the development and prevention of running-related injury , 2017 .

[3]  Michael K Drew,et al.  Who ‘owns’ the injury or illness? Who ‘owns’ performance? Applying systems thinking to integrate health and performance in elite sport , 2017, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[4]  M. Mansournia,et al.  Time-to-event analysis for sports injury research part 1: time-varying exposures , 2018, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[5]  Rasmus Oestergaard Nielsen,et al.  Towards a complex systems approach in sports injury research: simulating running-related injury development with agent-based modelling , 2018, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[6]  Guohua Li,et al.  Effects of minimum legal drinking age on alcohol and marijuana use: evidence from toxicological testing data for fatally injured drivers aged 16 to 25 years , 2015, Injury Epidemiology.

[7]  S. Fonseca,et al.  Complex systems approach for sports injuries: moving from risk factor identification to injury pattern recognition—narrative review and new concept , 2016, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[8]  A. Hulme,et al.  From control to causation: Validating a 'complex systems model' of running-related injury development and prevention. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[9]  Miguel A Hernán,et al.  Invited commentary: Agent-based models for causal inference—reweighting data and theory in epidemiology. , 2015, American journal of epidemiology.

[10]  G. Clermont,et al.  Agent‐based model of inflammation and wound healing: insights into diabetic foot ulcer pathology and the role of transforming growth factor‐β1 , 2007 .

[11]  M. Mansournia,et al.  Training load and structure-specific load: applications for sport injury causality and data analyses , 2017, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[12]  C. Finch,et al.  From monocausality to systems thinking: a complementary and alternative conceptual approach for better understanding the development and prevention of sports injury , 2015, Injury Epidemiology.

[13]  R. Hristovski,et al.  From microscopic to macroscopic sports injuries. Applying the complex dynamic systems approach to sports medicine: a narrative review , 2018, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[14]  Jay Wright Forrester,et al.  Urban Dynamics , 1969 .

[15]  Sandro Galea,et al.  Formalizing the role of agent-based modeling in causal inference and epidemiology. , 2015, American journal of epidemiology.

[16]  M. Mansournia,et al.  Time-to-event analysis for sports injury research part 2: time-varying outcomes , 2018, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[17]  Sheree Bekker,et al.  Bringing complexity to sports injury prevention research: from simplification to explanation , 2016, British Journal of Sports Medicine.