Brain injuries sustained by Canadian youth participating in Rugby Union
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Rugby is a high-intensity, full-body contact sport in which there is an increased risk of injury associated with participation. The objectives of this study were to identify the mechanisms and characteristics of rugby-related injury sustained amongst Canadian youth. Methods: Data were obtained from the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program database. The study population consisted of individuals aged 10-19 who sustained an injury while participating in rugby between the years 1990 and 2014. Proportions of body parts injured, mechanisms of brain injury, and nature of injury were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. Results: There were a total of 6200 rugby-related injuries sustained among individuals aged 10-19 between the years 1990 and 2014. 16.0% (N=993) of all injuries were brain injuries, 48.9% (n=486) of which were concussions. 70.7% (n=4838) of all injuries were sustained by males. The predominant mechanism of brain injury was tackling which accounted for 48.3% of all brain injuries n=480. Conclusion: Participation in rugby is rapidly increasing, and brain injury as a result of participation is a common occurrence. Possible changes to reduce injury include stricter penalties for high tackles to the head and neck area, and rules against blindside tackles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".