MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

SPORT CONCUSSION KNOWLEDGE BASE AND CURRENT PRACTICE– A SURVEY OF PHYSICIAN SECTIONS FROM THE ONTARIO MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

2014· article· en· W1976687379 on OpenAlexaffabout
Constance Lebrun, Martin Mrázik, Abhaya S. Prasad, Timothy Taylor, Tatiana Jevremovic

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityCarleton UniversityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionNeurocognitiveMedicinePsychological interventionCognitionPsychologyPhysical therapyPoison controlInjury preventionPsychiatryEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background It is critical that physicians understand concussion management. Objective Identify practice patterns/knowledge base in two physician populations. Design On-line survey. Setting Ontario, Canada. Participants Physicians from Sections: Sport and Exercise Medicine (SEM), General and Family Practice (SGFP). Interventions Emailed survey, 2 reminders. Main utcome measurements: Practice patterns/knowledge base, learning methods: current/preferred. Results Participants:SEM 92/594 (15.5%), SGFP 270/12,168 (2.2%); urban practice (90.2% SEM, 71.5% SFGP; P<.001). In preceding 3 months, 84.8% of SEM and 65.6% of SFGP had managed patients with concussion. More SEM than SGFP physicians saw >5 children under 18 with concussions per month (40.2% SEM, 9.5% SGFP; P<001).Tools:Clinical examination (92.4% SEM, 93.7% SFGP); Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT/SCAT2) (68.4% SEM, 34.1% SFGP; P<.001); balance testing (56.5% SEM, 37.4% SFGP; P=.001); computerized neurocognitive testing (23.9% SEM, 1.9% SFGP; P<.001); concussion grading scales (9.8% SEM, 14.1% SFGP; P<.001).Management:Complete physical rest (65.2% SEM, 68.5% SFGP); absolute cognitive rest (46.7% SEM, 51.9% SFGP); modified school/work until symptom resolution (50.0% SEM, 38.5% SFGP; P=.026); no cognitive rest (3.2% SEM, 9.6% SGFP; P=.026).Return-to-play:Clinical examination (87.0% SEM, 82.6% SFGP); SCAT/SCAT2 (60.8% SEM, 29.6% SFGP; P<.001); balance testing (56.5% SEM, 37.4% SFGP; P<.001); computerized neurocognitive testing (35.9% SEM, 2.2% SFGP; P<.001); concussion grading scales (7.6% SEM, 9.6% SFGP).Current learning sources:colleagues (55.4% SEM, 27.8% SFGP; P<.001); specialists (33.7% SEM, 23.7% SFGP; P=.030); continuing medical education (CME) courses/conferences (67.4% SEM, 54.7% SFGP; P=.017); journals/publications (48.9% SEM, 25.2% SFGP; P<.001); websites (35.8% SEM, 32.2% SFGP); medical school/residency training (19.6% SEM, 17.4% SFGP).Preferred learning sources:CME courses/conferences (85.9% SEM, 73.9% SFGP; P=.006); websites (35.9% SEM, 47.8%, SFGP; P=.024); medical school/residency training (37.0% SEM, 47.8% SFGP). Conclusions Gaps exist between consensus-based recommendations regarding concussions and current clinical practice patterns. Enhanced training in medical school/residency and additional CME initiatives are recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→