How much hard sparring a camp can carry

1. The question has no regulatory answer

Start where a reader would reasonably expect an answer to already exist: the rule book.

England Boxing's Technical and Competition Rules 2026 — version 26.2, published 14 January 2026, in force — devote a full section to sparring. Rule 5.7.1 defines it: "Sparring is defined as Boxing training where blows are delivered to the target area with significant but reduced force between Boxers in preparation for competitive boxing." That is a careful definition of a training activity, written by a national governing body that clearly takes the activity seriously.

The rule then sets four conditions. A boxer must be registered with documented medical clearance. Under rule 5.7.1b, "For reasons of safeguarding and safety, under no circumstances is sparring permitted for any Boxer under the age of 10 years old." A boxer must have a current Annual Medical, be declared fit to box by a doctor, and not be serving a medical suspension. And under 5.7.1d, all sparring must be supervised by an active, fully licensed Level 2 coach.

Read that list again and notice its shape. It governs who may spar, under whose supervision, and when a boxer must stop. It does not govern how much. We searched the full text of the rule book on 22 September 2026 and found no limit on rounds, sessions, minutes or intensity anywhere in it.

We then went looking wider — other boxing and MMA federations, athletic commissions, national governing bodies — and found no volume cap anywhere. The competition rule books we located, including USA Boxing's and the WBA's, govern what happens in a sanctioned bout. Training volume sits outside them entirely. That is written as of 22 September 2026; if a counter-example exists somewhere we did not reach, it supersedes this paragraph, and we would want to know about it.

2. The only number in the rules is a floor

There is one volume figure in England Boxing's sparring section, and its direction is the opposite of what a reader expects.

Rule 5.7.1f, adopted and effective from 1 June 2026, requires that "Boxers must have had an Annual Medical recorded on The Locker and taken part in active sparring for a minimum of 30 days before competing in their first bout (due to come into effect from June 1st 2026 onwards)", and the rule continues that this includes boxers with previous combat experience equating to one or more bouts.

A minimum. Thirty days of active sparring before you are allowed to compete. The governing body's judgement, written into a rule, is that a boxer who has not sparred enough is the more dangerous case — that an underprepared boxer in a sanctioned bout is a risk the rules should eliminate.

That is worth sitting with before you conclude that less sparring is straightforwardly safer. Sparring is not only an exposure. It is also how a fighter learns to see a punch coming, to slip, to tie up, to not be hit. Nobody has quantified that trade-off, in either direction, and the only governing body that has legislated on sparring volume at all legislated for more of it, not less.

Treat this number carefully. It is a floor for eligibility, not a target, not a dose, and not a statement about what a training week should contain.

3. What the rules do regulate: stopping

Where England Boxing's 2026 rules become genuinely prescriptive is in what happens after a head injury — including one that occurs in training.

Rules 5.7.1e and 4.1.5 provide that a knockout in sparring, or a sparring session stopped because a boxer took a blow or blows to the head, triggers the same medical suspensions and concussion protocols as a bout. A sparring KO is not treated as a lesser event than a competitive one.

Rule 4.1.2 sets out the stand-downs. A single occurrence of a knockout from a blow or blows to the head, with or without loss of consciousness, or a diagnosis of concussion, carries a 30-day suspension, after which the boxer must follow the approved England Boxing concussion protocols. Two KO or RSC(H) losses, or a concussion diagnosis, within three months means no boxing or sparring for at least 30 days after the second, then the protocol. Three within twelve months with a concussion diagnosis means no boxing or sparring for a year.

And rule 4.1.6 closes the obvious loophole in one sentence: "Any Boxer who has a medical restriction must not train or spar during the restriction."

The uncomfortable half is worth stating too. An RSC(H) — a contest stopped by the referee for head blows — without a concussion diagnosis carries no mandatory suspension under these rules, though the ringside doctor may impose one. The regulatory architecture depends on a diagnosis being made.

None of these day counts is a medical clearance. They are administrative minima inside one jurisdiction's rule book, and the clearance decision belongs to a physician. We cover the shape of that decision separately in returning to training after a knockout.

4. Most of your head impact is not in fights

Here is the reframe the article exists to deliver.

In the only combat-sports dataset that instrumented both training and competition, 896 head impacts were recorded and 827 of them happened in practice. The cohort was 23 boxing and MMA athletes, four of them women, wearing custom-fit instrumented mouthguards, with impacts video-verified — this is vendor-instrumented device data, recorded with an Impact Monitoring Mouthguard, and should be read as that. The sessions were unequal: 53 training sessions against 6 competitions. So that 92% reflects how much more training happens than fighting, not a per-exposure risk ratio.

It is still the point. A professional MMA fighter competes a handful of times a year and trains hundreds of hours — the researchers who ran the only MMA imaging study of sparring make exactly that observation as their rationale for studying training at all. Whatever cumulative head impact means for you, the overwhelming majority of it is being accumulated on Tuesday and Thursday nights, not on fight night.

The same dataset found that impacts in MMA produced significantly higher peak angular acceleration than impacts in boxing (P < .001), and that men took more impacts per practice session than women while impact magnitude did not differ significantly by sex. With four women in the cohort, that second finding is a hypothesis, not a demonstration.

5. What one session measurably does

Twenty amateur boxers completed three three-minute sparring bouts. Twenty controls did mock sparring. One hour later, the sparring group showed increased corticomotor inhibition, altered motor unit recruitment strategies and decreased memory performance relative to controls — measured by transcranial magnetic stimulation, decomposition EMG and memory testing. By the 24-hour follow-up, every measure was back to baseline.

That is a real, replicated-in-design, hour-long change from an ordinary session with nothing dramatic in it.

Now set it against the other finding. Seven competitive boxers were monitored across 16 sparring sessions with instrumented mouthguards and SCAT5 symptom scoring before, after and at 48 hours. There was no group-level symptom change across sparring (median change −1, p = 0.85). Symptoms were actually significantly lower at 48 hours than before (median change −1, p = 0.02). Four of the 16 sessions, from three participants, showed a symptom increase above 5. And there was no strong association between how much exposure a session contained and how symptoms moved. The authors' own summary: "Symptom number and severity PRE/POST sparring changes were rare and subtle, and the link to head impact exposure is unclear."

These two results are not in conflict. They measure different things. Neurophysiology moved; symptoms did not. Which means the thing you use to decide whether a session was too hard — how you feel afterwards — is not measuring the thing that changed.

You will feel fine either way. Feeling fine is not the measurement.

6. How much impact is in a round

The honest answer here is: it depends on the device, the threshold, the sport, the cohort and the session, and the published numbers are not comparable to each other.

Twenty-seven intercollegiate male boxers sparred two two-minute rounds — four minutes of work — wearing Instrumented Boxing Headgear. Mean impacts above a 9.6 g threshold: 27.63, with a standard deviation of 17.87. Mean peak linear acceleration 23.48 ± 15.20 g. Mean peak rotational acceleration 1,761.40 ± 1,064.34 rad/s².

One world-class male Muay Thai fighter was monitored with an instrumented mouthguard across seven sparring sessions in a two-week pre-bout camp: 590 impacts recorded, mean peak linear acceleration between 7.6 and 19.5 g across sessions, one event above 106 g with a maximum of 162.2 g, and multiple device-flagged events above 7,900 rad/s² with maxima between 19,862 and 26,850 rad/s². This is n = 1, using device-flagged events only, with no video verification, and it is vendor-instrumented data recorded with PROTeQT and HitIQ hardware. The authors say so themselves: "Because outputs are device- and processing-pipeline-specific and were not independently verified, threshold-based severity banding and extreme peaks should be interpreted cautiously."

Do not convert any of this into a personal weekly exposure estimate. The thresholds differ, the devices differ, the sports differ, and multiplying 27.63 by your own round count produces a number with no meaning.

You may also have seen a figure circulating that boxers take two to eight head impacts per minute in sparring, often set against a much lower figure for American football. We chased it and could not attach it to any primary source. We will not print it as a fact, and we would suggest treating any article that does as a source that did not check.

7. What stacking up years appears to do

Two studies tried to relate cumulative sparring exposure to outcomes. They point in different directions, and neither yields a number you can use.

In 237 professional boxers licensed in Maryland between 2003 and 2008 — 223 men, 14 women — researchers built a Cumulative Sparring Index: average sparring sessions per week, multiplied by rounds per session, multiplied by an intensity rating from 1 to 4, multiplied by years of professional training. All self-reported. Mean CSI 177.2 (SD 223.1), median 90.0, range 4 to 1,536. Higher cumulative exposure was associated with poorer information-processing speed on the Symbol Digit Modalities Test and greater balance deficit, with a threshold around CSI 148 above which a one-unit increase in log CSI was associated with roughly a six-point SDMT decline.

That index is a product of four terms. It cannot be read back out as rounds per week — several completely different training lives produce the same number. The exposure was self-reported, the design cross-sectional, and the authors state the limitation plainly: "Limitations to this study include the lack of age matched controls who are not involved in collision sports, the convenience sampling, and the cross-sectional nature of the study design."

The MMA study went the other way. In 94 active professional MMA fighters, more self-reported weekly sparring rounds was associated with larger left (β = 13.5 µL per round, 95% CI 2.26–24.8) and right (β = 14.9 µL per round, 95% CI 3.64–26.2) caudate volumes, with no significant association for thalamus, putamen, hippocampus or amygdala. That is the opposite of the intuitive direction, and the authors do not claim sparring is protective. Their own conclusion is a request for better work: "Given limitations inherent to the cross-sectional study design, more research is needed to further explore the brain effects of sparring in MMA."

Two studies, opposite signs, both cross-sectional, both self-reported, both in professionals. They do not resolve into a recommendation and this article will not pretend they do.

8. The closest thing to evidence that exposure is the lever

One study comes nearer than any other to showing that reducing head impact changes something.

Forty-five fighters who had transitioned out — defined as no sanctioned fights and no sparring for two years — were compared longitudinally against 45 demographically matched fighters still active. All male, boxing and MMA, 3T MRI, with blood neurofilament light measured in half the sample. The transitioned group improved on verbal memory (p_FDR = 4.73E-04), psychomotor speed (p_FDR = 4.73E-04) and processing speed (p_FDR = 3.90E-02), and their NfL declined (p = 0.02). The still-active fighters declined on cognition with stable NfL. Of 68 cortical regions, 54 showed thickness stabilising in the transitioned group and subtly declining in the active one.

Note what "transitioned" means: they stopped fighting and stopped sparring. Sparring cessation is half the definition. That is why this study matters here — and it is also why it cannot be stretched into camp design. The contrast is retirement, not a gym reducing its Thursday session. Forty-five men against 45 men, all professionals, observed rather than randomised.

It is the strongest available signal that exposure is a lever. It is not a demonstration that pulling that lever part-way, mid-career, does anything at all.

9. Nothing you can measure in the gym will tell you

If the rules do not answer the question, the natural next move is to measure your own athletes. That does not currently work either.

Biomarkers are not ready. A scoping review of 79 publications on biofluid markers after repetitive subconcussive head impacts found high or moderate risk of bias in most studies, noted that NfL "appeared to show promise", found S100B problematic for this purpose, and concluded: "Considering the limitations of the evidence base revealed by this first review dedicated to systematically scoping the evidence of biofluid marker levels following RSHI exposure, the field is evidently still in its infancy. As a result, any recommendation and application is premature." There is no blood test a gym can use to decide whether this week's sparring was too much.

Symptom scales barely move. That is the seven-boxer finding above: no group-level change, no strong link to exposure.

Instrumented mouthguards are research instruments. The three datasets here used three different devices with different thresholds and different verification standards, and their outputs are explicitly described by their own authors as device- and pipeline-specific. They are not a gym tool, and a number from one of them does not mean the same as a number from another.

What you can record is what was done. Sessions, duration, intensity, who was in the room, and what happened afterwards. That is a logbook, not a risk measure, and we write about the difference in training load monitoring for fighters.

10. CTE: what is established and what is disputed

Whether repetitive head impacts cause chronic traumatic encephalopathy is genuinely disputed in the current literature. Both positions have primary authors behind them and a reader deserves both.

The causal case. The 2023 neuropathological criteria paper from the group that authored the NINDS-NIBIB criteria reports that over 97% of published CTE cases have been in individuals with known exposure to repetitive head impacts, that CTE has a pathognomonic perivascular p-tau lesion at the depths of the sulci distinct from ageing or Alzheimer's disease, and that there is a robust dose-response relationship with years of play — the dose-response evidence cited is from American football, not boxing or MMA. Their conclusion: "While some suggest there is uncertainty whether a causal relationship exists between RHI and CTE, the preponderance of the evidence suggests a high likelihood of a causal relationship, a conclusion that is strengthened by the absence of any evidence for plausible alternative hypotheses."

The counter-case. A 2025 Sports Medicine paper by eight authors examined the epidemiological principles behind those claims of causality and reached the opposite verdict, pointing to shortcomings in how exposure (repetitive head impacts) and outcome (CTE) are defined and measured, and concluding: "We conclude that the evidence provided does not justify the causal claims." This is a dispute about inference, not about whether the pathology exists.

What both sides agree on. CTE is diagnosed only at autopsy. There is no confirmatory test in a living athlete and no specific treatment.

Which is why no percentage of living fighters with CTE exists. Every published case series is drawn from donated brains — from people, or families, who suspected a problem. A brain-bank count is not a population rate, and any article giving you one has made a category error.

11. TES is not CTE, and the distinction matters

There is one legitimate adjacent number, and it needs its label welded on.

In a volunteer professional fighters' brain-health cohort of active and retired fighters older than 34, 52 of 130 — 40% — were adjudicated as meeting the 2021 clinical criteria for traumatic encephalopathy syndrome by consensus conference. Those fighters showed significantly greater rates of hippocampal, subcortical grey, total grey and posterior corpus callosum volume loss and ventricular enlargement, plus greater reaction-time decline, than the TES-negative fighters.

Traumatic encephalopathy syndrome is a clinical syndrome — a pattern of symptoms and findings defined by criteria applied to a living person. It is not a pathological diagnosis and it is not CTE. A fighter meeting TES criteria has not been diagnosed with a neurodegenerative disease; they have been categorised by a research instrument. Say the full sentence or do not use the number.

A related finding from the same research programme, in 53 boxers and 103 MMA fighters: heavyweights showed greater yearly reductions in regional brain volume and function, while lightweights showed greater reductions per fight. The authors raise weight-cutting as a possible mediator of the lightweight per-fight finding — as a hypothesis, not a demonstration. If you fight at a weight you reach by cutting, that is one more reason to read our weight-cut material carefully; it is not evidence that the cut is doing it.

12. The history is messier than the headline

One more piece of context, because the popular picture of the damaged boxer is built mostly on 20th-century case reports.

A 2025 narrative review assembled 243 boxers described across 45 articles published between 1928 and 1999. Slurring dysarthria appeared in 49%, gait disturbance in 44%, memory loss in 36%, hyperreflexia in 25%, ataxia in 22%, increased tone in 19%, and an extensor Babinski sign in 16%. Frank dementia was described in 17%. Progression was not commented on at all in 60% of cases, described as progressive in 29%, and stationary or improving in 11%. A canonical neurodegenerative-like progression appeared in only 6%.

Those boxers fought under different rules, different medical supervision, and often for vastly longer careers than anyone fights today. The review is a narrative one, drawn from case literature of very variable quality. It is not evidence that modern sparring is benign. It is evidence that the clinical picture the phrase "punch-drunk" summons is less uniform, and less uniformly progressive, than the phrase implies — and that a syndrome described in that literature is not the same object as a pathological diagnosis made at autopsy.

13. Football has numbers. They are not your numbers.

The one governing body in any sport that has published volume limits for repeated head impact is football's.

The FA's heading guidance — adopted guidance, not a competition rule — states that for adult and professional players "It is recommended that heading practice is limited to 10 headers per session and only one session a week where heading practice is included", with no heading in training at U7 to U11, one session a week at U12 to U13, and graded limits through the youth ages.

That guidance exists because football ran a sport-specific measurement programme and derived limits from it. No equivalent derivation exists for sparring, and the football numbers do not convert — different sport, different impact mechanism, different evidence base. A header is a single, largely self-initiated, linear impact from a known object at a known moment. A sparring round is minutes of unpredictable rotational loading from a counter-punching opponent.

We have printed those numerals once, here, inside this paragraph, precisely because the temptation to carry them across is strong and usually silent. Do not carry them across.

14. What you can actually ask about your own gym

Since the answerable questions are structural rather than numeric, here is what they are. Every one maps to something already written into England Boxing's 2026 rules or to a gap the research is honest about.

Is a qualified coach in the room and watching, every time, rather than two athletes left to it while the session runs on elsewhere. Does the gym stop a session when someone is hurt — and then actually enforce a stand-down afterwards, rather than treating a sparring knockout as a lesser event than a competitive one. Is anybody serving a medical restriction still on the mats. Is "hard" a deliberate decision with matched partners and a stated purpose, or is it simply the default that happens when nobody sets one. Does anyone in the building know how much head contact each athlete took this week, even approximately.

And the one you can settle immediately: when a fighter says they have had enough today, does the room treat that as information or as weakness. Our piece on telling your coach you are hurt goes further into why that conversation is so often the failure point.

None of that produces a rounds-per-week figure, because no rounds-per-week figure exists to be produced. It produces a gym where the things that are regulated are actually happening, which is more than the evidence base can currently justify asking for.

What we could not verify

A safe or typical rounds-per-week figure for any combat sport. This is the central one. We found no federation, commission or national governing body that caps sparring volume, no study that derives a threshold, no dose-response curve, and no consensus statement. The circulating line that "most experts recommend hard sparring once or twice a week" has no named expert, no body and no study behind it. We will not print it, and we note without pleasure that it happens to describe exactly the schedule most readers are already on, which is what makes it so easy to swallow.

"Boxers take 2 to 8 head impacts per minute in sparring." This appears in search-engine summary text without an attributable primary source. We could not find it in anything we fetched. The measured figures we could source are in section 6, with their devices and thresholds attached.

"Most athletes spar twice weekly — live Saturday, technical Wednesday." Surfaced as though it were a study finding. We could not attach it to any published paper. It reads like one gym's schedule.

Any "X% of fighters have CTE" figure. No such prevalence figure exists for any living combat-sports population, because CTE is diagnosed only at autopsy and every case series is drawn from selected donated brains. The nearest legitimate number is the 40% TES-positive figure in section 11, and TES is a clinical syndrome, not CTE.

Any risk ratio for headguards or for boxing versus other combat sports from the 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis on head trauma in boxing. The retrieved abstract truncates mid-comparison, and we were not willing to print two numbers whose framing we could not see. The review's qualitative statement — that boxing carries an elevated concussion risk relative to other combat sports and that evidence on headguard efficacy is limited — is all we are prepared to carry.

Any measured outcome from a gym reducing hard sparring. This is the largest hole in the field. Nobody has published before-and-after imaging, biomarkers, symptom scores, injury rates or win rates for a gym that cut its sparring. The nearest thing in the literature is the retirement cohort in section 8, and that is cessation of fighting and sparring by people who had stopped competing.

Women. No adequately powered study of sparring exposure in women exists. The instrumented cohort had 4 women of 23. The Maryland boxers were 14 women of 237. The retirement cohort was male only. The MMA imaging study and the weight-class analysis do not report a female stratum in their abstracts. A systematic review of MMA injury names missing female data as a field-wide gap in its own conclusion: "Analysis of current literature emphasizes a lack of standardized definitions, data on training injuries, and female injuries, which are required to fully evaluate injury characteristics in MMA".

Adolescents. The only age rule we found anywhere is England Boxing's floor of 10 years old. A 2026 scoping review reports that earlier age of first exposure associates with worse neuropsychological outcomes, but it drew on 12 studies, screened by a single reviewer, with no formal critical appraisal — the authors say so. No measured sparring-exposure data exists for adolescent combat athletes.

Amateurs. Every long-horizon finding in this article comes from professionals. The amateur reader is represented by cohorts of 27 collegiate men, 23 mixed athletes, 20 amateur boxers and 7 competitive boxers. Those are the cohorts. They do not support a recommendation.

Muay Thai and kickboxing. Between them they have one instrumented sparring dataset, n = 1. One study's cohort is described as boxers in the paper and as boxers and Muay Thai athletes in the authors' own popular write-up; we have treated it as boxing.

Professional practice. We found reported coaching opinion arguing against hard sparring outside camp, including remarks attributed to a well-known UFC coach, but only through second-hand aggregation, with no primary transcript and no measured outcome. Coaching opinion is not evidence and we have not used it as such.

Sources

Sourced to

1. Sparring and the Brain: The Associations between Sparring and Regional Brain Volumes in Professional Mixed Martial Arts Fighters — Esagoff AI, Heckenlaible NJ, Bray MJC, Pasuizaca A, Bryant BR, Shan G, Peters ME, Bernick CB, Narapareddy BR, Sports Medicine, 2023. DOI 10.1007/s40279-023-01838-9, PMID 36972014
2. Sparring and Neurological Function in Professional Boxers — Stiller JW et al., Frontiers in Public Health 2:69, 2014. DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2014.00069
3. Understanding the Consequences of Repetitive Subconcussive Head Impacts in Sport: Brain Changes and Dampened Motor Control Are Seen After Boxing Practice — Di Virgilio TG, Ietswaart M, Wilson L, Donaldson DI, Hunter AM, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 13:294, 2019. DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2019.00294, PMID 31551732
4. Characterizing Head Impact Exposure in Men and Women During Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts — Jansen AE, McGrath M, Samorezov S, Johnston J, Bartsch A, Alberts J, Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine, 2021. DOI 10.1177/23259671211059815, PMID 34901294
5. Quantifying head impacts and neurocognitive performance in collegiate boxers — Doan BK, Heaton KJ, Self BP, Butler Samuels MA, Adam GE, Journal of Sports Sciences 40(5), 2022. DOI 10.1080/02640414.2021.2001175, PMID 34930100
6. Exploring the link between acute symptom changes and repetitive head impacts in boxing sparring — Le Flao E, Siegmund GP, Lenetsky S, Borotkanics R, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 2026. DOI 10.1016/j.jsams.2026.01.018, PMID 41672855
7. Quantifying Head Impacts in Elite Muay Thai: A Case Study Using Instrumented Mouthguards — Del Vecchio L, Climstein M, Brown DA, Sports (Basel) 14(3):111, 11 March 2026. DOI 10.3390/sports14030111, PMID 41893602
8. Longitudinal Changes in Cognitive Functioning and Brain Structure in Professional Boxers and Mixed Martial Artists After They Stop Fighting — Zhuang X, Bennett L, Nandy R, Cordes D, Bernick C, Ritter A, Neurology, 2022. DOI 10.1212/wnl.0000000000201158, PMID 36104283
9. Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE): criteria for neuropathological diagnosis and relationship to repetitive head impacts — McKee AC, Stein TD, Huber BR, Crary JF et al., Acta Neuropathologica, 2023. DOI 10.1007/s00401-023-02540-w, PMID 36759368
10. Epidemiological Principles in Claims of Causality: An Enquiry into Repetitive Head Impacts (RHI) and Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) — Fortington LV, Cassidy JD, Castellani RJ, Gardner AJ, McIntosh AS, Austen M, Kerr ZY, Quarrie KL, Sports Medicine, 2025. DOI 10.1007/s40279-024-02102-4, PMID 39277838
11. England Boxing Technical & Competition Rules 2026 (v26.2) — England Boxing, rule book published 14 January 2026, in force; Sections 3.6, 4.1 and 5.7 fetched and text-searched 22 September 2026
12. Heading in football — The Football Association, adopted heading guidance, fetched 22 September 2026; football, cited here only as a contrast case
13. Neurological Disorders and Clinical Progression in Boxers from the 20th Century: A Narrative Review — Castellani RJ, Kostelecky N, Ahrendsen JT, Nassan M, Jamshidi P, Iverson GL, Brain Sciences 15(7):729, 2025. DOI 10.3390/brainsci15070729, PMID 40722320
14. Longitudinal Changes in Regional Brain Volumes and Cognition of Professional Fighters With Traumatic Encephalopathy Syndrome — Conway Kleven BD, Chien LC, Labus B, Cross CL, Ritter A, Randall R, Montes A, Bernick C, Neurology, 2023. DOI 10.1212/wnl.0000000000207594, PMID 37380429
15. The Use of Biofluid Markers to Evaluate the Consequences of Sport-Related Subconcussive Head Impact Exposure: A Scoping Review — Lember LM, Ntikas M, Mondello S, Wilson L, Di Virgilio TG, Hunter AM, Kobeissy F, Mechref Y, Donaldson DI, Ietswaart M, Sports Medicine – Open, 2024. DOI 10.1186/s40798-023-00665-6, PMID 38270708
16. Injuries in Mixed Martial Arts After Adoption of the Unified Rules of MMA: A Systematic Review — Zachovajevas V, Engebretsen L, Moatshe G, Zachovajevas P, Røise O, Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine, 2025. DOI 10.1177/23259671251342578, PMID 40620723
17. Effect of Weight Class on Regional Brain Volume, Cognition, and Other Neuropsychiatric Outcomes among Professional Fighters — Bray MJC, Tsai J, Bryant BR, Narapareddy BR, Richey LN, Krieg A, Tobolowsky W, Jahed S, Shan G, Bernick CB, Peters ME, Neurotrauma Reports, 2021. DOI 10.1089/neur.2020.0057, PMID 34223552
18. Neuropsychological Health in Mixed Martial Arts Fighters and Combat Sport Athletes: A Scoping Review — Stern L, Sanders GJ, Peacock CA, Antonio J, Cureus, 2026. DOI 10.7759/cureus.113414, PMID 42643991; the authors state that no critical appraisal was performed
19. Chronic traumatic encephalopathy in athletes, players, boxers and military: systematic review — de Sena Barbosa MG et al., Annals of Medicine and Surgery 86:7238–7247, December 2024. DOI 10.1097/ms9.0000000000002693, PMID 39649931; mixed populations, not boxing only
20. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Investigating Head Trauma in Boxing — Donnelly KZ et al., Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine 33:658–674, 2023. DOI 10.1097/jsm.0000000000001195, PMID 37862081; cited only for its qualitative conclusions — see "What we could not verify"
21. Epidemiological analysis of athlete injuries in Muay Thai in-ring matches — Hallaçeli H et al., Injury Epidemiology, 2025. DOI 10.1186/s40621-025-00569-x, PMID 40420121; competition data only
22. How routine sparring can cause short-term impairment to boxers' brains — Di Virgilio TG, Hunter A, Ietswaart M, The Conversation, 4 October 2019; the authors' own plain-language account of their 2019 study

Read next