The effectiveness of a concussion-u educational presentation on knowledge and attitudes of concussion amongst elite bantam and midget hockey players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The diagnosis of a concussion is often dependent on the athlete self-reporting their symptoms. It has been suggested that improving athlete’s knowledge and attitudes towards concussions may increase self-reporting behavior; however, research in this area is inconclusive. The objective of this study is to determine if a Concussion-U educational presentation improves knowledge and attitudes of youth hockey players towards concussions. This is part of a larger study designed to determine the impact of an informational presentation on the knowledge and attitudes over a full hockey season. Methods: 56 elite male Bantam and Midget hockey players (mean age=14.52±1.13 years) were recruited from the local community. Each participant completed a modified version of Rosenbaum and Arnett’s Concussion Knowledge and Attitudes Survey (RoCKAS) questionnaire immediately before and after a Concussion-U educational presentation on the subject. Results: Concussion knowledge and attitude scores significantly (p<.001) increased from pre-presentation to post-presentation by 13.1% and 8.7%, respectively. Discussion: A Concussion-U educational presentation designed to improve concussion knowledge and attitudes in youth hockey players resulted in increased knowledge and improved attitudes towards concussion in elite male Bantam and Midget hockey players. Future research should examine the long-term effects of such presentations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".