Head injuries in youth soccer players presenting to the emergency department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There has been recent concern about neuropsychological injuries experienced by soccer players, particularly related to the purposeful heading of the ball. There are few population based analyses examining whether this is a legitimate concern. OBJECTIVES: To explore, using an existing injury surveillance system, one of many parts of this issue: acute injuries requiring emergency medical care experienced by youth soccer players. METHODS: Descriptive epidemiological analysis of emergency department injury surveillance data (1996-2001) for youths aged 10-24 years from the Kingston sites of the Canadian Hospital Injury Reporting and Prevention Program. RESULTS: A total of 1714 cases of soccer injury were identified (mean 286 a year); 235 (13.7%) involved diagnoses of injuries to the head. Leading mechanical factors resulting in head injury were contact with other players or persons (153/235; 65.1%) and balls (62/235; 26.4%). Heading was reported in 4/62 (6%) of the ball contact injuries, and attempted heading was reported in 15/153 (9.8%) of the cases involving person to person contact. Unspecified head to head contact between players was reported in 39 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Minor head injuries that result in emergency medical treatment do not happen often in youth soccer, and very few can be attributed to the purposeful heading of the ball. Player contact injuries appear to be a more important injury control concern. This study informs one of many aspects of the soccer heading injury debate.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".