Injury Prevention Strategies in Skiers and Snowboarders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With associated snow sports injury risks being well documented, the scope for preventative medicine is clear. This article focuses on potential precautions taken by skiers/snowboarders and how they vary between different snow sport groups. A total of 181 randomly selected individuals from the Whistler/Blackcomb Medical Centre, Canada, took part in this questionnaire-based cohort study, examining snow sports activity, preventive measures, and protective equipment use. Most individuals were ski area residents of advanced expertise, with 50% having had a previous snow-riding injury. The most commonly reported significant ski injury was anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture, while in snowboarders, it was wrist fracture. Skiers were more likely to improve fitness levels before going onto the slopes, whereas crossover riders (both skiing and snowboarding) were more likely to take lessons. Most individuals used eye and sun protection and had adequately warm clothing. Beyond basic precautions, protective equipment and preventive measures are used infrequently. It is suggested that by increasing awareness and use of such equipment, injury rates may be reduced.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".