MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052020962 · doi:10.1519/jsc.0000000000000757

Integration of the Functional Movement Screen Into the National Hockey League Combine

2015· article· en· W2052020962 on OpenAlexafffund
Chip P. Rowan, Christiane Kuropkat, Robert J. Gumieniak, Norman Gledhill, Veronica Jamnik

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersYork University
KeywordsLeagueMovement (music)Physical medicine and rehabilitationComputer scienceMedicineArtAestheticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sport of ice hockey requires coordination of complex skills involving musculoskeletal and physiological abilities while simultaneously exposing players to a high risk for injury. The Functional Movement Screen (FMS) was developed to assess fundamental movement patterns that underlie both sport performance and injury risk. The top 111 elite junior hockey players from around the world took part in the 2013 National Hockey League Entry Draft Combine (NHL Combine). The FMS was integrated into the comprehensive medical and physiological fitness evaluations at the request of strength and conditioning coaches with affiliations to NHL teams. The inclusion of the FMS aimed to help develop strategies that could maximize its utility among elite hockey players and to encourage or inform further research in this field. This study evaluated the outcomes of integrating the FMS into the NHL Combine and identified any links to other medical plus physical and physiological fitness assessment outcomes. These potential associations may provide valuable information to identify elements of future training programs that are individualized to athletes' specific needs. The results of the FMS (total score and number of asymmetries identified) were significantly correlated to various body composition measures, aerobic and anaerobic fitness, leg power, timing of recent workouts, and the presence of lingering injury at the time of the NHL Combine. Although statistically significant correlations were observed, the implications of the FMS assessment outcomes remain difficult to quantify until ongoing assessment of FMS patterns, tracking of injuries, and hockey performance are available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.238

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Strength and Conditioning ResearchSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207