Sport-Related Concussions: Knowledge Translation Among Minor Hockey Coaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate minor hockey coaches' knowledge base of sport-related concussions. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Subjects independently completed the written survey at preseason organizational meetings. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred seventy-eight active coaches spanning 5 age levels (ages 5-15 years). Coaches reported 2.62 ± 3.73 years of coaching experience. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Resources where coaches obtained information about concussions, perceptions of variables associated with concussions, knowledge level of issues associated with concussions, and decision-making practices. RESULTS: Newspapers and magazines were the most frequent source of information regarding concussions, yet were rated as not very helpful. Family physicians were less frequently sought but were rated as most helpful. A majority of coaches reported limited knowledge about concussions but rated this knowledge as being important. There was a significant relationship between head coaching experience and concussion knowledge [R = 0.09, F3,156 = 4.41, P = 0.005]. Most coaches demonstrated a good knowledge base of common issues associated with concussions, and a majority of individuals correctly identified return-to-play practices. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of minor hockey coaches correctly recognized and understood issues related to sport-related concussions. Results suggested that knowledge translation through various formal and informal sources has had a positive effect. However, a majority of coaches reported having limited knowledge about concussions yet consider it an important topic.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".