MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1457448442 · doi:10.1520/stp155220120143

Impact Attenuation Values and Prevention of Head Injuries on Sports Fields: Do Athletes Deserve Protection the Same As or Better Than in an Automobile Crash?

2014· book-chapter· en· W1457448442 on OpenAlexaff
Rolf Huber

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nuclear Laboratories
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesCrashHead (geology)PsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAeronauticsMedicineForensic engineeringComputer securityPhysical therapyEngineeringComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the United States in the period from 2001 to 2005, there were more than 560 000 football- and soccer-related injuries per year among all age groups that resulted in an emergency department (ED) visit, and over 32 000 were traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) (Gilchrist, J., Thomas, K. E., Wald, M., and Langlois, J., “Nonfatal Traumatic Brain Injuries from Sports and Recreation Activities—United States, 2001–2005,” MMWR Weekly, Vol. 56, No. 29, 2007, pp. 733–737). U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics for 2001 to 2009 for patients 19 years and under indicate that for football- and soccer-related injuries, annual ED visits numbered 487 000, and the number of TBIs was 35 800 (Gilchrist, J., Thomas, K. E., Xu, L., McGuire, L. C., and Coronado, V., “Nonfatal Traumatic Brain Injuries Related to Sports and Recreation Activities among Persons Aged ≤19—United States, 2001-2009,” MMWR, Vol. 60, No. 39, 2011, pp. 1337–1342). It is suggested that TBI, especially in children, is underreported by as much as 10-fold. A concussion in a child or a high school or college-aged patient can have long-term debilitating effects, as such patients recover slower than adults or professional athletes, and a second concussion prior to complete recovery from the first could be life-altering. Studies suggest that the current thresholds in ASTM F1936 for sports fields should get another look from injury-prevention specialists and advocates. It is suggested that for fields being utilized for both helmeted and non-helmeted sports, the test be performed with a hemispherical headform and that both Gmax and head injury criteria be considered. The playing surface industry was still operating in the 1970s to 1980s with threshold values of Gmax not exceeding 200 g for establishing the limit for fields in use. There are injury data to support a reduction of Gmax to a maximum of 125 g, and consideration should be given to reducing it to 110 g.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207