Low Back Pain in Elite and Semi-elite Australian Football Codes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No study has investigated the levels and prevalence of low back pain (LBP) occurring in Australian football codes (Australian Rules, soccer, rugby league and rugby union) or at different levels of athletic play (elite and semi-elite). PURPOSE: To document the levels and prevalence of LBP symptoms in Australian male elite and semi-elite level football code players and to compare data with an age-matched non-athletic population. METHODS: Subjects were drawn from clubs playing in the national or international competition for elite players (n=271) and the highest level state competition for semi-elite players (n=360). Age matched controls were drawn from a convenience sample of university students and office workers (n=152). Subjects completed the validated and reliable Quadruple Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire (short form), along with a series of specific LBP questions regarding frequency and duration of symptoms, age of first onset LBP and aetiology. Group means were compared using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: There was a significant increased difference between controls and semi-elites and between semi-elites and elites for current VAS, VAS average and VAS at worst (all p<0.01) (controls 1/10 v semi-elites 2/10 v elites 3/10 for current and average VAS, controls 4/10 v seim-elites 5/10 v elites 6/10 for VAS at worst). The average pain profile was also clinically significant between controls and elites (p<0.01). There was a significant difference between controls and combined elite and semi-elites for VAS at best (p<0.01) (controls 0/10 v semi-elites and elites 1/10). There was a significant difference between controls and semi-elites combined compared with elites for levels of overall pain, sensory aspect of pain severity and total pain rating (all p<0.01). There was no difference between the age of first onset of LBP for any group (average age 17). 85% of elites, 65% of semi-elites and 53% of controls said their first ever episode or attack of LBP was due to athletic activities. The point prevalence of LBP was 69% for elites, 57% for semi-elites and 55% for controls. 93% of elites, 75% of semi-elites and 49% of controls said their current episode of LBP was due to athletic activities. 40% of elites, 31 % of semi-elites and 17% of controls experience daily or weekly LBP. CONCLUION: Footballers in Australia compared with age-matched controls have significantly higher levels and prevalence of LBP and this figure escalates significantly with level of play. It appears from this cohort that the mechanism for pain is associated with non-contact athletic activity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".