Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. Jordan D. Metzl, MD* 1. 2. *Medical Director, The Sports Medicine Institute for Young Athletes; Assistant Attending Physician, Sports Medicine Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY. Objectives After completing this article, readers should be able to: 1. Discuss the importance of preparticipation screening of young athletes. 2. Delineate the importance of the sports grading system. 3. List key points in the medical and family history that can affect sports performance and sports safety. This series of two articles for Pediatrics in Review addresses the preparticipation examination (PPE) as a method of screening adolescents for athletic participation. The first article addresses implementing the PPE as a screening tool and the important issues in the medical and family history portion of the examination. The second article, to be published next month, covers the medical and orthopedic examination portions of the PPE. Together, these two articles delineate a comprehensive approach to the safe and effective screening of the adolescent athlete. A sample PPE form is included at the end of the second article. The number of adolescent athletes participating in organized sports continues to increase yearly in the United States, now totaling more than 14 million. Sports involvement is important for teenagers, teaching lessons such as leadership skills and group dynamics that are important for success in later life. Sports participation also encourages a dedication to physical fitness, which is especially important in the United States, where the incidence of pediatric and adolescent obesity has more than doubled over the past 30 years. Pediatricians, concerned with the healthy development of their teenage patients, should view the trend toward increasing sports involvement extremely favorably. The pediatrician traditionally has provided medical clearance for young athletes involved in organized sports prior to the beginning of each sports season. In past years, this process was limited in scope and effectiveness, often addressing issues of general health such as cardiac and pulmonary disease, but offering minimal input about musculoskeletal pathology. Pediatric training programs, most of which offer …
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".