Concussion education and awareness support group: the value of a pilot clinical program as an essential Knowledge Transfer and Exchange (KTE) strategy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To pilot test a concussion education and support workshop as a Knowledge Transfer and Exchange (KTE) intervention for enhancing knowledge and education post-concussion. Design Prospective, pre-post design to pilot test a KTE intervention. Setting Sport Concussion Clinic patients and their parents. Subjects Five concussed athletes (4 males; 1 female) ages 10–39 years (mean=29±10 years) and their parents (N=4). Intervention An education presentation based on 2008 Concussion in Sport Meeting content (Zurich, Switzerland) consisting of case studies, discussion questions and a workbook. Outcome Measures A survey was designed to examine baseline and changes in concussion knowledge and attitudes, and was administered pre and post intervention. A workshop evaluation assessed preferred learning methods and workshop satisfaction. Results Knowledge improvements regarding the return-to-play protocol (RTP; 22%), when to RTP (11%) and start rehabilitation (45%) were seen. Knowledge gaps were associated with the role of CT/MRI and protective equipment. Athletes acknowledged the seriousness of concussion and felt relief that they were not alone. The workshop was considered a successful form of peer support for the athletes and overall support for the parents. Conclusions This intervention is a potentially effective KTE strategy for optimising concussion knowledge and education post-injury, and providing support throughout the concussion recovery process. Participants indicated they wanted to learn more about recovery techniques and coping, and would like to receive information electronically. The limited sample size reinforces the need to continue examining the role of such workshops using a larger group design. Establishing online peer support and education workshops in a webinar format would be an appropriate next step. Acknowledgements Alternative Funding Program Innovation Funds, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Competing interests None.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".