Literature Decoded

Living reprintoriginally published in PLOS ONE 2024CC BY 4.0Read the version of record Opt out

Literature DecodedLiving reprint
Living reprint · journal article Journal version available

Incidence, demographics, characteristics and management of acute Achilles tendon rupture: An epidemiological study

Study first published in PLOS ONE (2024), reprinted in full under its CC BY 4.0 licence.

Samuel Briggs-Price1*ORCID iD 0000-0001-7435-3173, Jitendra Mangwani2, Linzy Houchen-Wolloff3, Gayatri Modha4, Emma Fitzpatrick2, Murtaza Faizi2, Jenna Shepherd2, Seth O’Neill1ORCID iD 0000-0002-0904-1381

1School of Healthcare, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom2Orthopaedics, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom3Centre for Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, United Kingdom4Emergency Care, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom*Corresponding author

Reprinted 2026-10-01 8 min read Living reprint · journal article Version of record: PLOS ONE 2024Licence: CC BY 4.0

Reading mode
In plain languageStudy first published in PLOS ONE (2024), reprinted in full under its CC BY 4.0 licence.

Study first published in PLOS ONE (2024), reprinted in full under its CC BY 4.0 licence.

No plain-language summary has been written for this reprint yet. The authors' abstract and full text follow, unchanged apart from layout.

Educational summary of research findings; not medical advice. Discuss care decisions with a qualified clinician.

Bottom line

What the evidence supports

How to read it

No plain-language summary has been written for this reprint yet. The authors' abstract and full text follow, unchanged apart from layout.

Limitations

The findings apply to the included study populations and may not generalise to every person or setting.

Disclaimer

Educational summary of research findings; not medical advice. Discuss care decisions with a qualified clinician.

The paper

Full manuscript

Abstract

Background

Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) account for 10.7% of all tendon and ligament injuries and causes lasting muscular deficits and have a profound impact on patients’ quality of life. The incidence, characteristics and management of ATR in the United Kingdom (UK) is poorly understood. This investigation aims to understand the incidence of ATR in the UK.

Methods

Prospective data collection of ATR incidence from a United Kingdom Emergency department. Retrospective review of management protocols and immobilisation duration from electronic medical records.

Results

ATR incidence is 8 per 100,000 people per annum. Participants were predominately male (79.2%) and primarily reported a sporting mechanism of injury (65.2%). Mean immobilisation duration was 63.1 days. 97.1% were non-surgically managed post ATR. 46.2% of participants had experienced a previous ATR or Achilles tendinopathy prior to their current ATR.

Conclusion

The incidence of ATR found was 8. cases per 100,000 people per annum. Most ATR were managed non-surgically in this cohort. The majority of ruptures occurred during sporting activity. Almost one quarter (23.3%) of individuals report Achilles pain prior to ATR.

Background

The Achilles tendon (AT) is the largest and strongest tendon in the body1. Through elastic energy storage, the AT improves movement efficiency, transmitting forces of 2.7–3.95 times body weight during walking and 4.15 to 7.71 when running2. Achilles tendon ruptures (ATR) can occur when tendon strain exceeds maximum tendon capacity. Common mechanisms for ATR include sudden or violent dorsiflexion of the ankle or a sporting acceleration-deceleration mechanism3. ATR are the most common tendon ruptures accounting for 10.7% of all tendon and ligament injuries4. Incidence rates range is 2.5–47 per 100,000 person-years in north America and Europe5–10. ATR incidence is rising, with the most significant increase between the ages of 40–596, 7. Significant variation in incidence occurs due to the population sampled (male/female), sample age, geographic range (local/regional/national), sampling setting (emergency department/medical database review) or time of sampling (season). UK ATR incidence increased from 6–13 per 100,00 person years from 1995 to 201911, 12. However, this data represents ATR incidence in Scotland and a single NHS trust in England. Further incidence data is required to improve understanding of ATR incidence in England.

Risk factors for ATR can be categorised as intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic factors include AT properties, age, sex, genetics and systemic comorbidities. Extrinsic factors include sporting activity, exposure to AT loading and medications13, 14. Previous studies have proposed that the rising incidence of ATR is associated with the increasing use of medications associated with ATR in an active, aging population15. However, the quality of evidence remains low and further research is required to understand the demographics of the ATR population in the UK.

Surgical and non-surgical management approaches following ATR have been compared extensively. In the UK, non-surgical approaches represent standard practice due to comparable rates of re-rupture with accelerated functional rehabilitation protocols and lower associated complications16–20. Recent randomised controlled trials have reported an increased re-rupture risk following non-surgical management21. However, in this trial, non-surgical management did not represent the typical accelerated functional rehabilitation non-surgical management protocols that have been developed in the UK, such as the Leicester Achilles Management Protocol (LAMP) and Swansea Morriston Achilles Rupture Treatment (SMART) protocol22, 23. AT re-ruptures are reported between 0.9–2% when adopting these non-surgical protocols. However, due to significant loss to follow up, the studies investigating these protocols may under-represent non-surgical re-rupture rates and should be interpreted with caution.

This investigation aims to 1) identify the incidence of ATR in the UK 2) identify the characteristics of the ATR population 3) Identify rates of surgical and non-surgical management including duration of boot immobilisation.

Methods

Trial design

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of individuals presenting to the emergency department (ED) diagnosed with ATR. Data was collected at a National Health Service (NHS) Trust from March 2015 to June 2021.

Participants

All individuals with clinically confirmed ATR documented in ED medical notes were included in the analysis. Comorbidity and medication data was extracted from ED medical notes. In addition to routine comorbidity data collection, participants were asked if they had experienced previous Achilles injury or pain. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively to determine management protocols (surgical/non-surgical) and controlled mobilisation (VACOped™ boot) (Fig 1) duration. The NHS trust studied routinely uses the Leicester Achilles Management Protocol (LAMP)22 consisting of 8 weeks-controlled mobilisation.

Fig 1. Vacoped controlled mobilisation boot.
Fig 1. Vacoped controlled mobilisation boot.

Data analysis

Data was analysed using SPSS (V28.0, IBM, New York, USA). Data distribution was assessed for normality and reported as means/ median with standard deviation (SD)/ interquartile range (IQR).

Annual incidence data was calculated using complete years. Population data was taken from the County Council demography report24. Comorbidity/ medication data used for comparison was taken from NHS or musculoskeletal health reports25–27.

The relationship between mechanism of injury, demographics, comorbidities and medications are explored. The management approach (surgical/non-surgical) was analysed in relation to participant demographics, comorbidities and duration to present to ED. Groups were compared using an independent t-test or non-parametric equivalent.

Results

There were 361 participants diagnosed with ATR in ED and included in analysis. Participant’s median (IQR) age was 45 (19) years and were predominantly male (79.2%). Comorbidity and medication data was available for 328 and 316 participants. Comorbidities and medications documented on ED assessment and the comparison to local prevalence are displayed in Tables 1 and 2. Concurrent with routine data collection, pre-rupture Achilles pain/ injury data was collected from 117/361 participants. Achilles pain/ injury prior to ATR was reported by 46.2% (n = 54/117) of participants (Table 3). In participants with Achilles pain/ injury, 61.1% (n = 33/54) reported their complaint bilaterally or on the side of current ATR. There was no significant difference in the number of comorbidities between participants who reported previous AT pain or rupture and participants with no prior symptoms.

Table 1. Number and classification of comorbidities.
ATR Participants (n = 328)General Population
Number of Comorbidities Mean (SD)1.2 (1.5)
Diabetes n (%)22 (6.9)6.5%
Hypertension n (%)40 (12.6)13.8%
Cardiovascular Disease n (%)33 (10.3)9.1%
Rheumatological condition n (%)3 (1.0)0.7%
Respiratory n (%)31 (9.8)7.8%
Other Musculoskeletal n (%)70 (22.1)32%
Table 2. Number and classification of medications.
ATR Participants (n = 316)General Population
Number of Medications Mean (SD)1.1 (1.8)
Statin n (%)37 (11.7)14%
Antihypertensive n (%)46 (14.6)15%
Analgesia n (%)14 (4.4)11%
Proton Pump Inhibitors n (%)18 (5.7)11%
Steroids n (%)29 (9.2)Inhaled:17 (58.6)
Injected: 5 (17.2)
Oral:7 (24.1)
Antibiotics (fluoroquinolones) (%)2 (0.6)
Anticoagulants (%)5 (1.6)5%
Anti-inflammatories (%)13 (4.1)11%
Table 3. Achilles pain/injury pre-rupture.
Achilles Pain/ Injuryn (%)
Contralateral Achilles Rupture (n = 117)19 (16.2)
Ipsilateral Achilles Rupture (n = 117)7 (6.0)
Contralateral Achilles Tendinopathy (n = 112)2 (1.8)
Ipsilateral Achilles Tendinopathy (n = 112)16 (14.3)
Bilateral Achilles Tendinopathy (n = 112)10 (8.9)
Total participants reporting Achilles Pain/Injury Pre-Rupture (n = 117)54 (46.2)

The primary mechanism of injury was sporting activities (65.2%). Participants with a sporting mechanism of injury had a mean (SD) age of 41.0 (12.2) years in comparison to 55.4 (13.4) in participants with a non-sporting mechanism of injury (p = 0.55). Participants with a sporting mechanism of injury had statistically significantly fewer comorbidities (0.9 (1.3) vs 1.7 (1.8), p = <0.001) and medications (0.7 vs 1.7, p = <0.001) than those with a non-sporting mechanism of injury.

The median (IQR) time to present to ED following injury was 0 days (1). Nearly all (97.1%) of the participants were non-surgically managed post ATR. There were no significant differences in age or number of comorbidities between surgical and non-surgical groups. The surgical group had a greater mean (days) duration between initial injury and presenting to ED (2.6 (4.9) vs 1.9 (4.8), p = 0.36). The mean (SD) duration wearing the immobilisation boot was 63.1(10.8) days.

The ATR per month incidence rate for each year (March 2016-June 2021) is provided in Fig 2 for all participants.

Fig 2. Achilles tendon rupture incidence per month.
Fig 2. Achilles tendon rupture incidence per month.

Annual ATR incidence was calculated for complete years (2016–2020, n = 277). The mean (SD) annual incidence was 56 (6) ATR per year. An incidence rate of 8 per 100,000 people per annum.

The reference line shows the line of best fit over the last 6 years of ATR data.

Discussion

The incidence of ATR presenting to ED was 8 per 100,000 people per annum. Consistent with previous UK ATR data, an increasing incidence of ATR was identified11. International ATR incidence rates are varied, these findings report a higher incidence than the United States, 3.2 per 100,000 person years7 but lower than other nations (29.5–32.3 per 100,000 person years)5, 6. Incidence reports in the United States represent data from an electronic database review7. As all medical centres were not included, this review is unlikely to capture all ATR and is expected to under-represent the true incidence rate in the United States.

The ATR population is predominantly male, and injuries most commonly occur during sporting activities. This is consistent with current incidence studies5–7. However, males represented a greater proportion of participants and ATR were more frequently associated with non-sporting mechanisms than previously observed7, 28.

Medications and comorbidities may contribute to ATR aetiology13, 14. The overall distribution of comorbidities and medications were similar to the general population. Fluroquinolones were only reported in two cases despite the known association with ATR29. The medication dose and interaction between concomitant medications was not investigated and may have a significant impact on ATR risk. The lack of comorbidities and medications found may be due to ATR primarily occurring in the sporting population who present with less comorbid health conditions. In this study, the non-sporting population are older and have greater number of comorbidities and medications. Identifying an older subgroup who present with greater number of comorbidities may provide an insight into tailoring future immobilisation and rehabilitation protocols.

Previous ATR or pain was reported in nearly half of participants. This is the first UK data on Achilles symptoms prior to rupture. As data collection was additional to usual care the sample was limited and findings should be interpreted with caution. In comparison, previous studies found one third of participants experience Achilles symptoms prior to ATR30. Achilles tendinopathy is a risk factor for ATR with 4% of individuals with Achilles tendinopathy experiencing ATR14, 30. It is unknown if current interventions for AT pathologies reduce the risk of ATR as the ability to alter tendon structure is debated31.

The UK management of ATR is predominantly non-surgical. This contrasts with surgical management rates seen internationally5, 6. The immobilisation duration is consistent with published protocols in this region of the UK22. There is a disparity with other regions in the UK which adopt longer immobilisation periods23.

Study limitations

This study was limited to a single ED site, it is expected that primary care sites across the region that were not included in this analysis will manage acute ATR. Therefore, the incidence reported is conservative and ATR presenting to secondary care is anticipated to be higher. Future research needs to include larger numbers of primary care sites across the UK to determine the true incidence rate and management of ATR. Understanding current ATR incidence and management is essential for the development of future care in this population.

Conclusion

The incidence rate of ATR in England is higher than previously reported elsewhere in the UK. There is a continuing trend towards increasing ATR incidence each year. Non-sporting mechanisms of injury are more common than previously reported and occur in an older population with greater number of comorbidities and medications.

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to thank the University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust healthcare professionals who have supported data collection.

List of abbreviations

AT
Achilles Tendon
ATR
Achilles Tendon Rupture
UK
United Kingdom
LAMP
Leicester Achilles Management Protocol
SMART
Swansea Morriston Achilles Rupture Treatment
ED
Emergency Department
NHS
National Health Service
SD-
Standard Deviation
IQR
Interquartile Range

Declarations

Funding

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Sources

References

31 references, in the article's own order. Citation numbers in the text are this list's numbers (25 records are cited).

  1. The Anatomy of the Achilles Tendon

    O’Brien M.

    200510:225–38 · PMID 15922915doi:10.1016/j.fcl.2005.01.011

  2. The load borne by the Achilles tendon during exercise: A systematic review of normative values

    Demangeot Y, Whiteley R, Gremeaux V, Degache F

    2022· PMID 36278501doi:10.1111/sms.14242

  3. Achilles Tendon Rupture: Mechanisms of Injury, Principles of Rehabilitation and Return to Play

    Tarantino D, Palermi S, Sirico F, Corrado B

    2020Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology 5(4):95–0 · PMID 33467310doi:10.3390/jfmk5040095

  4. The epidemiology of musculoskeletal tendinous and ligamentous injuries

    Clayton RAE, Court-Brown CM

    200839:1338–44 · PMID 19036362doi:10.1016/j.injury.2008.06.021

  5. Incidence and Treatment Trends of Achilles Tendon Ruptures in Finland: A Nationwide Study

    Leino O, Keskinen H, Laaksonen I, Mäkelä K, Löyttyniemi E, Ekman E

    202210:23259671221131536 · PMID 36389616doi:10.1177/23259671221131536

  6. The epidemiology and trends in management of acute Achilles tendon ruptures in Ontario

    Sheth U, Wasserstein D, Jenkinson R, Moineddin R, Kreder H, Jaglal SB

    2017Canada: a population-based study of 27 607 patients 78–86 · PMID 28053261doi:10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0434.R1

  7. Epidemiology of Achilles Tendon Ruptures in the United States: Athletic and Nonathletic Injuries From 2012 to 2016

    Lemme NJ, Li NY, DeFroda SF, Kleiner J, Owens BD

    20186:2325967118808238 · PMID 30505872doi:10.1177/2325967118808238

  8. Incidence of Achilles tendon rupture: 25-year regional analysis with a focus on bilateral ruptures

    Andrej Čretnik, Roman Košir

    2023Journal of international medical research 51(11):3000605231205179 · PMID 37976267doi:10.1177/03000605231205179

  9. Increasing incidence of acute Achilles tendon rupture and a noticeable decline in surgical treatment from 1994 to 2013

    Ganestam A, Kallemose T, Troelsen A, Barfod KW

    2016Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(12):3730–3737 · PMID 25697284doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3544-5

  10. Acute achilles tendon ruptures: incidence of injury and surgery in Sweden between 2001 and 2012

    Huttunen T.T., Kannus P., Rolf C., Felländer-Tsai L., Mattila V.M.

    2014The American journal of sports medicine 42(10):2419–2423 · PMID 25056989doi:10.1177/0363546514540599

  11. Changing Incidence of Achilles Tendon Rupture in Scotland: A 15-Year Study

    Maffulli N, Waterston S, Squair J, Reaper J, Douglas S

    19999:157–60 · PMID 10512344doi:10.1097/00042752-199907000-00007

  12. The influence of the COVID pandemic on the epidemiology of Achilles tendon ruptures in east Shropshire, United Kingdom

    Carmont MR, Morgan F, Fakoya K, Heaver C, Brorsson A, Nilsson-Helander K

    2023Journal of ISAKOS 8(2):94–100 · PMID 36375752doi:10.1016/j.jisako.2022.10.002

  13. Predictors of Primary Achilles Tendon Ruptures

    Claessen F, de Vos R-J, Reijman M, Meuffels D

    201444:1241–59 · PMID 24929701doi:10.1007/s40279-014-0200-z

  14. Risk factors for Achilles tendon rupture: an updated systematic review

    Xergia SA, Tsarbou C, Liveris NI, Hadjithoma Μ, Tzanetakou IP

    20221–11 · PMID 35670156doi:10.1080/00913847.2022.2085505

  15. Drug treatments associated with Achilles tendon rupture. A case‐control study involving 1118 Achilles tendon ruptures

    Nyyssönen T, Lantto I, Lüthje P, Selander T, Kröger H

    2018Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports 28(12):2625–2629 · PMID 30120842doi:10.1111/sms.13281

  16. Surgical versus non-surgical treatment for acute Achilles’ tendon rupture

    Reda Y, Farouk A, Abdelmonem I, El Shazly OA

    2020A systematic review of literature and meta-analysis 26:280–8 · PMID 31027878doi:10.1016/j.fas.2019.03.010

  17. Surgical Versus Non-Surgical Methods for Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

    Zhou K, Song L, Zhang P, Wang C, Wang W

    201857:1191–9 · PMID 30368430doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2018.05.007

  18. Surgical Versus Conservative Intervention for Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture: A PRISMA-Compliant Systematic Review of Overlapping Meta-Analyses

    Zhang H, Tang H, He Q, Wei Q, Tong D, Wang C

    201594:e1951 · PMID 26559266doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000001951

  19. Surgical Treatment Versus Conservative Management for Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

    Deng S, Sun Z, Zhang C, Chen G, Li J

    201756:1236–43 · PMID 29079238doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2017.05.036

  20. Comparing Surgical and Conservative Treatment on Achilles Tendon Rupture: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of RCTs

    She G., Teng Q., Li J., Zheng X., Chen L., Hou H.

    2021Frontiers in surgery 8:607743 · PMID 33681281doi:10.3389/fsurg.2021.607743

  21. Nonoperative or Surgical Treatment of Acute Achilles’ Tendon Rupture

    Myhrvold SB, Brouwer EF, Andresen TKM, Rydevik K, Amundsen M, Grün W

    2022The New England journal of medicine 386(15):1409–1420 · PMID 35417636doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2108447

  22. Non-operative functional treatment for acute Achilles tendon ruptures: The Leicester Achilles Management Protocol (LAMP)

    Aujla RS, Patel S, Jones A, Bhatia M

    201950:995–9 · PMID 30898390doi:10.1016/j.injury.2019.03.007

  23. The treatment of a rupture of the Achilles tendon using a dedicated management programme

    Hutchison AM, Topliss C, Beard D, Evans RM, Williams P

    2015510–5 · PMID 25820890doi:10.1302/0301-620X.97B4.35314

  24. Leicestershire County Council

    Leicestershire Joint Strategic Needs Assessment 2018–2021 Demography Report

    2021

  25. Health, social care and lifestyles Summary of key findings

    Health Survey for England 2016

    2018

  26. Prescribed Medicines Health Survey

    Health Survey for England 2016

    2017

  27. The State of Musculoskeletal health 2021 Arthritis and other musculoskeletal conditions in numbers

    Arthritis Versus

    2021

  28. Epidemiology of Achilles tendon ruptures: Increasing incidence over a 33-year period

    Lantto I, Heikkinen J, Flinkkilä T, Ohtonen P, Leppilahti J

    201525:e133–8 · PMID 24862178doi:10.1111/sms.12253

  29. Relative and Absolute Risk of Tendon Rupture with Fluoroquinolone and Concomitant Fluoroquinolone/Corticosteroid Therapy: Population-Based Nested Case–Control Study

    Morales D.R., Slattery J., Pacurariu A., Pinheiro L., McGettigan P., Kurz X.

    2019Clinical drug investigation 39(2):205–213 · PMID 30465300doi:10.1007/s40261-018-0729-y

  30. The Risk of Achilles Tendon Rupture in the Patients with Achilles Tendinopathy: Healthcare Database Analysis in the United States

    Yasui Y, Tonogai I, Rosenbaum AJ, Shimozono Y, Kawano H, Kennedy JG

    20172017:7021862–4 · PMID 28540301doi:10.1155/2017/7021862

  31. How do tendons adapt?

    Docking SI, Cook J

    2019Going beyond tissue responses to understand positive adaptation and pathology development: A narrative review 19:300–10 · PMID 31475937

Article record

The record

Status

Living reprint · journal article Journal version available

Status
Version of record: PLOS ONE 2024
Journal version
PLOS ONE (2024) · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304197
Confirmed
2024-06-21
Licence
CC BY 4.0

This reprint has no DOI of its own: cite the journal article.

The journal's version is the version of record. This page re-typesets it under the article's licence; where they differ, the journal's version is authoritative.

Version history

  1. Published in PLOS ONE2024-06-21
  2. Living reprint on Literature Decoded2026-10-01
  3. Reprinted here2026-10-01
  4. This HTML2026-10-01

Cite this article

Citation
Briggs-Price S, Mangwani J, Houchen-Wolloff L, Modha G, Fitzpatrick E, Faizi M, et al. Incidence, demographics, characteristics and management of acute Achilles tendon rupture: An epidemiological study. PLoS One. 2024;19(6):e0304197. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304197
BibTeX
@article{BriggsPrice2024Incidence,
  title     = {Incidence, demographics, characteristics and management of acute Achilles tendon rupture: An epidemiological study},
  author    = {Samuel Briggs-Price and Jitendra Mangwani and Linzy Houchen-Wolloff and Gayatri Modha and Emma Fitzpatrick and Murtaza Faizi and Jenna Shepherd and Seth O’Neill},
  journal   = {PLOS ONE},
  year      = {2024},
  volume    = {19},
  number    = {6},
  pages     = {e0304197},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0304197},
  pmid      = {38905182},
  publisher = {PLOS}
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Incidence, demographics, characteristics and management of acute Achilles tendon rupture: An epidemiological study
AU  - Samuel Briggs-Price
AU  - Jitendra Mangwani
AU  - Linzy Houchen-Wolloff
AU  - Gayatri Modha
AU  - Emma Fitzpatrick
AU  - Murtaza Faizi
AU  - Jenna Shepherd
AU  - Seth O’Neill
JO  - PLOS ONE
PY  - 2024
VL  - 19
IS  - 6
SP  - e0304197
DO  - 10.1371/journal.pone.0304197
PB  - PLOS
SN  - 1932-6203
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0304197
ER  -

Cite the original article (the version of record), not this reprint.

Take it with you

One self-contained HTML file: the text, data and figures, readable offline.

Disclaimer and limitations

Educational summary of research findings; not medical advice. Discuss care decisions with a qualified clinician.

The findings apply to the included study populations and may not generalise to every person or setting.

Licence and attribution

This page reproduces Incidence, demographics, characteristics and management of acute Achilles tendon rupture: An epidemiological study by Samuel Briggs-Price, Jitendra Mangwani, Linzy Houchen-Wolloff, Gayatri Modha, Emma Fitzpatrick, Murtaza Faizi, Jenna Shepherd, Seth O’Neill, first published in PLOS ONE 2024;19(6):e0304197, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0304197, PMID 38905182, PMC11192343. © 2024 Briggs-Price et al. It is used under the CC BY 4.0 licence.

Changes made:

The words, data, figures and conclusions are the authors’. Literature Decoded is not the publisher of record and does not claim endorsement by the authors or the journal. The version of record is the journal’s; cite it.

Licence statement in the article: “This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.”

Are you an author of this article? Claim it or ask us to take it down.

Cite this article

Living reprint · journal article