Exposure to Head Impacts and Cognitive and Behavioral Outcomes in Youth Tackle Football Players Across 4 Seasons
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Repetitive head impacts have been posited to contribute to neurocognitive and behavioral difficulties in contact sport athletes. Objective: To identify associations between cognitive and behavioral outcomes and head impacts measured in youth tackle football players over 4 seasons of play. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted from July 2016 through January 2020, spanning 4 football seasons. The setting was a youth tackle football program and outpatient medical clinic. Players were recruited from 4 football teams composed of fifth and sixth graders, and all interested players who volunteered to participate were enrolled. Data analysis was performed from March 2020 to June 2021. Exposures: Impacts were measured using helmet-based sensors during practices and games throughout 4 consecutive seasons of play. Impacts were summed to yield cumulative head impact gravitational force equivalents per season. Main Outcomes and Measures: Ten cognitive and behavioral measures were completed before and after each football season. Results: There were 70 male participants aged 9 to 12 years (mean [SD] age, 10.6 [0.64] years), with 18 completing all 4 years of the study. At the post-season 1 time point, higher cumulative impacts were associated with lower self-reported symptom burden (β = -0.6; 95% CI, -1.0 to -0.2; P = .004). After correcting for multiple comparisons, no other associations were found between impacts and outcome measures. At multiple times throughout the study, premorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, and depression were associated with worse cognitive or behavioral scores, whereas a premorbid headache disorder or history of concussion was less often associated with outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort of youth tackle football players, premorbid conditions, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, and depression, were associated with cognitive and behavioral outcomes more often than cumulative impact.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».