MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

NEUROCOGNITIVE PERFORMANCE AT RETURN TO PLAY IN ELITE YOUTH HOCKEY PLAYERS WITH SPORT-RELATED CONCUSSION

2014· article· en· W2001586454 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kerry Taylor, BL Brooks, KJ Schneider, TA Blake, Carly McKay, W. H. Meeuwisse, Karen Barlow, Jane Kang, Carolyn A. Emery

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionNeurocognitiveMedicinePhysical therapyPoison controlIce hockeyCognitionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationVerbal memoryInjury preventionPsychologyPsychiatryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Neurocognitive recovery following sport-related concussion is important for re-injury risk reduction. In elite youth hockey, it is unknown if neurocognitive function returns to baseline values at the time of medical clearance to return to play (RTP). Objective To determine if ImPACT composite scores have returned to baseline values at the time of medical clearance to RTP. Design Prospective case series. Setting Sport Medicine Clinics (Alberta, Canada). Participants Concussed elite male and female youth (13–17 years) ice hockey players (n=68) and healthy controls (n=22) completed ImPACT and SCAT2 testing at baseline and RTP following concussion. Main outcome measurements Team therapists/trainers referred concussed players to the study sport medicine physician. The physician determined RTP via symptom resolution and SCAT2 score normalization. Physicians were blinded to ImPACT (Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing) composite scores (verbal memory, visual memory, reaction time and visual motor), which were used to evaluate neurocognitive performance. Results Comparisons between baseline and RTP ImPACT scores were based on reliable change (RC) scores derived from a sample of healthy players tested twice at baseline within 2 weeks (RC scores with 90% CI: verbal memory +/−14; visual memory, +/−15; reaction time, +/−0.1; and visual motor, +/−8). All four ImPACT composite scores were normalized at RTP in 73.5% (95C% CI: 61.5–82.8) of concussed participants and all but one [95.5%; 95% CI:70.39–99.46) controls. In the concussed players, 25.0% (95% CI: 16.0–36.9) had 1 composite score not return to baseline at RTP. One player had three composite scores not return to baseline at RTP. Conclusions Elite hockey players are often cleared for RTP without the benefit of knowing neurocognitive performance on ImPACT. In this cohort, 25% of concussed players who were cleared to return to hockey had 1 composite score that had not yet returned to baseline. These results may have implications for tertiary prevention.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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