The canadian best practices portal for health promotion and chronic disease prevention: a place to go for program planning in injury prevention in sport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background While participation in sports contributes to health and well being, it also increases risk for injury in both amateur and professional athletes. Consequently, the prevention of sport injuries ranks relatively high on the public health agenda. The Portal provides program planners with information needed to plan, implement and evaluate interventions. Objective To share the outcome of a partnership between the Portal and the Ontario Neurotrauma Foundation designed to increase the number of best practices available in the prevention of sport injuries on the Portal. Design Information about each best practice is compiled into an annotation summary for the Portal. These summaries link to program resources and tools, and outline features of the interventions such as strategies and theories. Setting The best practices focus on a range programs that include bicycling, equestrian, ATV, snowmobile, snowboarding, football, rugby, hunting, and diving activities. Many of these sport-related interventions are delivered at sport facilities, while others are home-based or school-based. Participants The Portal's primary audiences are decision makers in health promotion, public health and chronic disease prevention, and non-government and voluntary organisation program coordinators. Interventions The Portal contains approximately 15 interventions related to prevention of injury in sports. A few examples of these interventions will be discussed in the presentation. Main outcome measurements All interventions housed on the Portal have been evaluated, shown to be successful, and have the potential to be adapted and replicated by other health practitioners working in similar fields. Results The Portal is a place for program planners to get evidence-based best practices related to injury prevention in sports, which results in better program planning. Conclusions This presentation will provide a better understanding of the purpose of the Portal and of the scope of sport injury prevention information that can be found there.
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 | 0.011 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.080 | 0.020 |
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".