Bodychecking Rules and Concussion in Elite Hockey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Athletes participating in contact sports such as ice hockey are exposed to a high risk of suffering a concussion. We determined whether recent rule changes regulating contact to the head introduced in 2010-11 and 2011-12 have been effective in reducing the incidence of concussion in the National Hockey League (NHL). A league with a longstanding ban on hits contacting the head, the Ontario Hockey League (OHL), was also studied. A retrospective study of NHL and OHL games for the 2009-10 to 2011-12 seasons was performed using official game records and team injury reports in addition to other media sources. Concussion incidence over the 3 seasons analyzed was 5.23 per 100 NHL regular season games and 5.05 per 100 OHL regular season games (IRR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01, 1.50). When injuries described as concussion-like or suspicious of concussion were included, incidences rose to 8.8 and 7.1 per 100 games respectively (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 0.81, 1.32). The number of NHL concussions or suspected concussions was lower in 2009-10 than in 2010-11 (IRR 0.61; 95% CI 0.45, 0.83), but did not increase from 2010-11 to 2011-12 (IRR 1.05; 95% CI 0.80, 1.38). 64.2% of NHL concussions were caused by bodychecking, and only 28.4% of concussions and 36.8% of suspected concussions were caused by illegal incidents. We conclude that rules regulating bodychecking to the head did not reduce the number of players suffering concussions during NHL regular season play and that further changes or stricter enforcement of existing rules may be required to minimize the risk of players suffering these injuries.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".