Sex Differences and Self-Reported Attention Problems During Baseline Concussion Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amateur athletic programs often use computerized cognitive testing as part of their concussion management programs. There is evidence that athletes with preexisting attention problems will have worse cognitive performance and more symptoms at baseline testing. The purpose of this study was to examine whether attention problems affect assessments differently for male and female athletes. Participants were drawn from a database that included 6,840 adolescents from Maine who completed Immediate Postconcussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) at baseline (primary outcome measure). The final sample included 249 boys and 100 girls with self-reported attention problems. Each participant was individually matched for sex, age, number of past concussions, and sport to a control participant (249 boys, 100 girls). Boys with attention problems had worse reaction time than boys without attention problems. Girls with attention problems had worse visual-motor speed than girls without attention problems. Boys with attention problems reported more total symptoms, including more cognitive-sensory and sleep-arousal symptoms, compared with boys without attention problems. Girls with attention problems reported more cognitive-sensory, sleep-arousal, and affective symptoms than girls without attention problems. When considering the assessment, management, and outcome from concussions in adolescent athletes, it is important to consider both sex and preinjury attention problems regarding cognitive test results and symptom reporting.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".