Major scandal forces the chair of the International Concussion in Sport Group to step down from post ahead of 6th consensus statement process in October
By Malayka Gormally. This article was initially published in our Concussion Update newsletter; please consider subscribing.
In the last two weeks, the Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) has become engulfed in a scandal that will have ramifications for concussion prevention and management across the globe. Dr. Paul McCrory, “chair of the Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) and lead author of four of the five Consensus Statements on Concussion in Sport,” resigned from his position on March 5 following revelations of multiple instances of plagiarism in his publications, according to an article in The Guardian.
The consensus statements “shape concussion protocols in myriad international sports, including football, rugby union, NFL and Australian rules,” alongside management and care for non-sport-related concussions worldwide. The timing of this scandal is crucial because the next meeting of CISG (which meets every four years) is this October in Amsterdam.
McCrory’s plagiarized articles were published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine (BJSM) when McCrory was the Editor-In-Chief of BJSM, potentially tarnishing the reputation of “the leading publication for sport and exercise science.” A March 7 blog post by Nick Brown, a “self-appointed data police cadet,” details seven McCrory articles that included extensive plagiarism, all published in the BJSM, and three books chapters with plagiarism that list McCrory as one of the authors.
In addition to plagiarism, there is a concern that McCrory had an agenda to downplay the risks of concussion, repetitive hits, and CTE, possibly influencing what research the BJSM chose to publish (or not publish) and recommendations in the CISG’s consensus statements. There are also concerns that big-sports money influences the CISG; “The CISG counts the International Olympic Committee, FIFA and World Rugby among its benefactors.” Critics say that the consensus statements downplay risks and return athletes to play possibly sooner than is safe.
Predating this scandal, in October 2021, an international group of experts and patient advocates authored a paper, Toward Complete, Candid, and Unbiased International Consensus Statements on Concussion in Sport, published by Cambridge Press University. Most of the authors are part of an international working group called the Repercussions Group. (Concussion Alliance is part of this group but joined after the paper was written.)
Stephen T Casper et al. write, “This commentary argues that there is a strong need for a new approach to [a consensus statement] that foregrounds public health expertise and patient-centered guidance. Doing so will help players, parents and practitioners keep perspective about these potentially life-altering injuries especially when they recur.” For these and other reasons, the resulting statements “have promoted sports-friendly viewpoints that could be construed to pronounce concussions and repeated subconcussive impacts more benign, recoverable, transient, and reversible injuries than we consider reasonable.” To read more about this paper, see this newsletter edition (in the Education section).
The entire global concussion community is watching to see who will be the new Chair of the CISG and whether they will have strong ties to sport-industry money that could influence the writing of the consensus. There is an international scramble to rethink the structure of CISG and the consensus statement process.
