MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089376794 · doi:10.1097/jsm.0000000000000025

Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine Position Statement

2013· article· en· W2089376794 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard Goudie, Jessica L. Page

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsU SPORTS
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRecreationLegislationInjury preventionOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsSports medicinePosition statementPoison controlSuicide preventionCyclingMedical emergencyPhysical therapyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION The Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine (CASEM) has updated the position statement regarding the support for mandatory use of bicycle helmets. This revises the previous version written in 2002. This statement reflects changes that occurred during the past 10 years. There has been more focus on the adoption of the helmet as a protective device and the means to promote its use including educational and legislative efforts. These recommendations are made with the support of scientific studies and systematic reviews of existing evidence. BACKGROUND SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION Around the world, bicycles are used daily for transportation, exercise, and recreation. Their use is becoming more recognized as a form of environmentally protective mode of transportation. All age groups are represented among cyclists. Cycling is not without risk. Reported hospitalizations related to cycling in Canada between 1994 and 2004 represented 2% of hospitalized injuries.1 Head injuries account for about 35% to 40% of pediatric hospitalizations resulting from bicycle-related trauma.2 Much attention has been directed at bicycle safety and decreasing cycling injuries. Wearing a properly fitted helmet decreases head injuries by 63% to 88% in all ages of bicyclists.3 Helmets are also protective against upper facial injuries.3 As the protective value of wearing a helmet is recognized, efforts are now directed at encouraging cyclists to adopt this protective method. Even where education campaigns have been shown to increase the utilization of helmets,4 many countries are introducing helmet-wearing legislation to increase helmet use. Although safety benefits have been demonstrated, opponents to helmet legislation have concerns that ridership will decrease if people are required to wear helmets thus eliminating the health benefits of this activity. Evidence has shown increased helmet use with introduction of legislation.5,6 This is associated with a decreased injury rate and has not been shown to decrease ridership.5,7 Multiple studies have shown consistent evidence that wearing appropriate bicycle helmets results in significant decrease in head injuries by up to 88% and facial injuries by 65%.3 However, despite this evidence, the lower cost and increased comfort of bicycle helmets, utilization of bicycle helmets has not been universally adopted. United States data in 1999 revealed that, depending on the state, 13% to 65% of children reported always wearing a helmet while cycling.6 A Canadian survey found that between 30% and 73% of bicyclists self-reported wearing helmets, depending on the province and the status of legislation.7 An observational study in Ontario, where helmets are only required by law by bicyclists under 18 years of age, found the prevalence of helmet use to be approximately 50% of all age riders on average, with use dropping to 35% in casual bicyclists (ie., noncommuters).8 In view of the health benefits of the activity and the demonstrated decreased injury rates, the focus has been directed in increasing helmet wear by participants. Certain jurisdictions around the world including Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and Canada have introduced legislation in order to overcome this resistance. The population's ages affected by these new laws and the enforcement of this legislation varies among the different jurisdictions. Recent research related to the wear of bicycle helmet utilization has focused on the effectiveness of these programs. In Canada, 4 provinces mandate use by all age groups (British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick) and 2 mandate use by those of less than 18 years of age (Ontario and Alberta). One study noted that children cycling with adults wearing a helmet were more likely to wear a helmet (95%) versus those cycling with adults not wearing one (41%).9 Using self-reported data, bicyclists in a province with legislation requiring helmets for all ages were many times more likely to report wearing a helmet than those in a province with no helmet legislation (Odds Ratio, 8.99, 95% Confidence Interval, 6.87–11.75).7 Implementation of bicycle helmet use has not only found increased utilization but also a decrease in head injuries.5,7 Based on available data, it appears that any legislation will increase the use of helmets. The varying success of these new rules appears to be multifactorial, with greatest effect in areas with lower baseline helmet use and in those where laws apply to all ages.10,11 Youth populations were more likely to wear a helmet when legislation applied to all ages as opposed to only 18 years and younger.7 The fit of a bicycle helmet is important to obtain maximum benefit from its use. One study reported a 1.96-fold increase in head injury among those who sustained injury riding a bike while wearing a poorly fitted helmet compared with those sustaining injury while wearing a helmet with optimal fit.12 There is still some sentiment that legislating the use of bicycle helmets will discourage bicycle riding.13,14 Interest is growing in this area of injury prevention, as the implementation of laws and education campaigns have been in effect for some time. Analysis of behavioral changes is now taking place. Early post-legislation observation in Ontario has shown no change in bicycling trends in young children between 1993 and 1999.12 Recent research has found implementation of helmet legislation was not related to decreases in recreational and commuting bicycle use.7,15 Enforcement of rules is another issue mentioned by opponents of legislation. Not much available data exists regarding this aspect of law implementation. A study conducted in Georgia (United States) looked at the differences in helmet use before and after enforcement of the rules and found a definite increase in the adoption of the helmet by cyclists.16 RECOMMENDATIONS The Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine presents its position regarding the wearing of bicycle helmets, providing information for medical professionals and members of the general public who support the mandatory use of bicycle helmets. The Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine position on bicycle helmet use includes: That all Provincial and Territorial governments should enact comprehensive legislation mandating that bicyclists of all ages wear helmets. All organized sporting events associated with cycling should require mandatory use of helmets by all participants. The Canadian Academy of Sports and Exercise Medicine recommends that cyclists select ANSI, SNELL, CSA, or CPSC approved helmets. Effective protection requires properly fitted helmets, which includes a snug fit and coverage of the user’s forehead. The Canadian Academy of Sports and Exercise Medicine supports programs that promote helmet usage and support affordability. The Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine supports the above statements based on the existing evidence showing: Helmet use in cyclists significantly decreases head and facial injuries Helmet use is increased by legislation of all-ages groups Legislation does not decrease participation in the activity

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.367 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of Sport MedicineSame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207