MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059554245 · doi:10.1097/jsm.0b013e31803f901b

The Effect of Wrist Guards on Wrist and Arm Injuries Among Snowboarders: A Systematic Review

2007· review· en· W2059554245 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWinter Sports Injuries and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWristOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialCohort studyMeta-analysisPhysical therapyCohortRelative riskMEDLINEConfidence intervalSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review studies that examined the effectiveness of wrist guards in preventing wrist injuries among snowboarders. DATA SOURCE: MEDLINE (1966-March 2005), EMBASE (1988-March 2005), Cochrane (2005 Issue 1), Sport Discus (1975-March 2005) were searched using variations of the term "snowboard." PubMED was searched for the year 2005 to capture any recently published studies not yet indexed in MEDLINE. The reference lists of included studies and conference proceedings were also searched. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if the number of wrist injuries between wrist guarded and unguarded snowboarders could be ascertained. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies were included. Six studies were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Information regarding study design, patient characteristics, wrist guard characteristics, data source (for cohort and case-control studies), and results (type and severity of injury, compliance, and adverse events) were extracted. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data from RCTs and cohort studies were expressed as relative risks with odds ratios presented for case-control studies. The risk of wrist injury (RR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.13, 0.41), wrist fracture (RR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.10, 0.87), and wrist sprain (RR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.07, 0.41) was significantly reduced with the use of wrist guards. Among the case-control studies, wrist guards significantly lowered the odds of sustaining a wrist injury (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.62). In an RCT, the risk ratio suggested wrist guards protect the shoulder (RR: 0.22; 95% CI: 0.01, 4.60). Nonexperimental data suggested the possibility that wrist guards may increase the risk of finger and elbow-shoulder injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Wrist guards reduce the risk of wrist injuries among snowboarders. For every 50 snowboarders who were a wrist guard, one wrist injury will be averted. Future research should focus on determining the optimal type of wrist guard and if they increase the risk of other upper extremity injuries.

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 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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.405 · 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