Concussions in hockey: there is cause for concern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to document various aspects of concussion in Canadian Amateur hockey including demographics, causes, treatment, and prevention in order to guide future recommendations on how to reduce injury. METHODS: A detailed prospective and retrospective concussion history was obtained from British Columbia Junior Hockey League players over the course of two seasons (1998-2000). RESULTS: Higher rates of concussions occur in games versus practice, and there was an overrepresentation of forwards injured versus defensemen or goaltenders. There was between 4.63 and 5.95 concussions per 1000 player/game hours with the average age of the first hockey-related concussion in the 15th year. The greatest cause of concussion was contact with the ice and/or the boards. Fighting was not a major cause of concussion, although other illegal actions such as elbowing were. CONCLUSIONS: The primary recommendation to reduce the number and severity of concussions is to eliminate plays where there is a demonstrable intent to injure another player. Concussions in hockey are of considerable concern; however, there is now encouraging information with respect to the treatment of 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".