Emotional response to sport concussion compared to ACL injury
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: To ascertain and compare the nature of emotional response of athletes to concussion and to anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury. RESEARCH DESIGN: Pre-injury, post-injury and longitudinal emotional functioning of athletes with concussion (n = 16), athletes with ACL injuries (n = 7) and uninjured athletes (n = 28) were compared in a prospective repeated-measures design. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Participants completed the short version of the Profile of Mood States (POMS). ANOVAs and trend analysis were used to examine between and within group differences across time on two sub-scales, Total Mood Disturbance and Depression. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Athletes with ACL injury reported higher levels of depression for a longer duration than athletes with concussion. Relative to un-injured controls, athletes with concussion reported significant changes in Total Mood Disturbance and Depression post-injury, whereas athletes with ACL injuries reported significant changes in Depression scores only. Different patterns of post-injury emotional disturbance for the injured groups were observed by trend analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Concussed athletes do not report as much emotional disturbance as athletes with ACL injuries. Differential patterns of emotional disturbance were detected between injured groups. The authors recommended that clinical protocols and educational programmes address emotional sequelae associated with sport concussion and ACL injury.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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 it