On-Field Predictors of Neuropsychological and Symptom Deficit Following Sports-related Concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Investigate the relationship between on-field markers of concussion severity and postinjury neuropsychological and symptom presentation in an athlete-specific population. DESIGN: Case control study. SETTING: Multicenter analysis of high school and college athletes. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 78 athletes sustaining sports-related concussion were selected from a larger sample of 139 concussed athletes. ASSESSMENT OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES: On-field presence of disorientation, posttraumatic amnesia, retrograde amnesia, and loss of consciousness. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: ImPACT, a computerized neuropsychological test battery, was administered pre-season and, on average, 2 days postinjury. Good postinjury presentation (n = 44) was defined as no measurable change, relative to baseline, in terms of both ImPACT memory and symptom composite scores. Poor presentation (n = 34) was defined as a 10-point increase in symptom reporting and 10-point decrease in memory functioning (exceeding the 80% confidence interval for measurement error on ImPACT). Athletes failing to meet good or poor selection criteria (n = 61) were not included in the analysis. RESULTS: Odds ratios revealed that athletes demonstrating poor presentation at 2 days postinjury were over 10 times more likely (P < 0.001) to have exhibited retrograde amnesia following concussive injury when compared with athletes exhibiting good presentation. Similarly, athletes with poor presentation were over 4 times more likely (P < 0.013) to have exhibited posttraumatic amnesia and at least 5 minutes of mental status change. There were no differences between good and poor presentation groups in terms of on-field loss of consciousness. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of amnesia, not loss of consciousness, appears predictive of symptom and neurocognitive deficits following concussion in athletes. Athletes presenting with on-field amnesia should undergo comprehensive and individualized assessment prior to returning to sport participation. Continued refinement of sports concussion grading scales is warranted in lieu of consistent findings that brief loss of consciousness is not predictive of concussion injury severity.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".