Studies in orthopaedic sports medicine are increasingly reporting "return to sport" outcomes as primary endpoints, but the terminology used to describe return to sport and athlete level remains inconsistent. Variability in these definitions, ranging from "any participation" to "return to competitive play" produces wide discrepancies in reported success rates and undermines comparability across studies. This issue is highlighted by instances where reported return to sport rates fluctuate significantly depending on the exact definition used. This variability is driven by the failure of generalized outcomes to capture the individualized utility (usefulness or satisfaction) of the treatment for the athlete. This editorial's purpose is to provide a practical guide and standardized framework for authors and researchers to improve clarity, reproducibility, and interpretability in sports medicine publications.
Rosinsky et al. (2026) studied this question.