Exercise following a sport induced concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if an athlete's capacity to perform exercise is impaired following concussion and whether this would be reflected by an altered heart rate response. METHODS: Of the 14 concussed athletes, nine missed playing time as a direct result of their concussion and five did not. The concussed athletes performed an exercise protocol on a cycle ergometer within 72 hours of being asymptomatic at rest and a second test at 5 days following the previous assessment. Matched controls (n = 14) were tested using the same time line. The exercise protocol consisted of a 2 minute warm up, 10 minute, low-moderate intensity, steady state exercise session, and a high intensity interval protocol. The interval protocol consisted of a 40 second high intensity bout, followed by a 40 second rest period. This protocol continued until the participant had reached volitional fatigue. RESULTS: The number of exercise bouts completed was not significantly different from their matched controls. However, concussed athletes who missed playing time had a significantly higher heart rate during the steady state exercise session. During this same period, they also exhibited a greater rise in heart rate over time. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that exercise capacity is unaffected in concussed athletes who are asymptomatic at rest. However, their heart rate response to submaximal exercise is increased.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".