1 year test–retest reliability of ImPACT in professional ice hockey players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) battery is widely used to assess neurocognitive outcomes following sports-related concussion. The purpose of this study was to examine the 1 year test-retest reliability of ImPACT in a multilingual sample of professional hockey players. A total of 305 professional hockey players were tested 1 year apart using ImPACT. Reliable change confidence intervals were calculated and test-retest reliability was measured using Pearson and Intraclass correlation coefficients. Results indicated that the 1-year test-retest reliabilities for the Visual Motor and Reaction Time Composites ranged from low to high (.52 to .81). In contrast, 1-year test-retest reliabilities for the Verbal and Visual Memory Composites were low (.22 to .58). The 1-year test-retest results provided mixed support for the use of Visual Motor and Reaction Time Composites in select samples; in contrast, the Verbal and Visual Memory Composites may not be sensitive to clinical change.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".