Femoroacetabular impingement in elite ice hockey players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the presence of clinical and radiological femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) in elite ice hockey players and compare it to a control group of non-athletes. METHODS: Forty participants (20 non-athletes and 20 elite ice hockey athletes) underwent an evaluation of their hip joint, including assessment of range of motion and special provocative impingement tests. Two musculoskeletal radiologists assessed MRIs completed on each participant for radiological findings associated with FAI, including alpha angle, acetabular version angle, acetabular depth, and/or a lateral centre edge angle, and findings of labral and cartilage degeneration. A comparative analysis of the clinical and radiological findings was subsequently completed. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the radiological CAM impingement measured by mean alpha angle between both groups (non-athletes: 43.2 degrees, SD 9.7; and athletes: 54.2 degrees, SD 12 (p = 0.003)). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups upon evaluating PINCER impingement. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical examination findings between both groups. CONCLUSION: MRI evidence suggests that CAM impingement is more common in the elite ice hockey athlete in comparison with non-athletes. However, as this is a pilot study examining findings in asymptomatic individuals, there is a need for a longitudinal prospective cohort study. In keeping with this, sufficient, long-term follow-up is required to assess at what point, if any, these subjects with radiological findings become symptomatic.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".