MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096142689 · doi:10.1177/0009922814558256

Development of a Conservative Protocol to Return Children and Youth to Activity Following Concussive Injury

2014· article· en· W2096142689 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Carol DeMatteo, Kathy Stazyk, Sheila K. Singh, Lucy Giglia, Robert D. Hollenberg, Charles H. Malcolmson, William J. Mahoney, Jessica A. Harper, Cheryl Missiuna, Mary Law, Dayle McCauley

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pediatrics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineConcussionProtocol (science)ExcellenceAthletesInjury preventionPoison controlSuicide preventionOccupational safety and healthHuman factors and ergonomicsPhysical therapyMedical emergencyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Consensus-based guidelines exist for adult athletes returning to play after concussion, but there are no protocols developed specifically for children. The goal of this knowledge translation research was to develop evidence-based materials to inform physicians about pediatric concussion. METHODS: A pediatric concussion protocol was developed based on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence procedures. RESULTS: This return to activity protocol was developed to guide management when children/youth sustain a concussion. The protocol incorporated 3 main themes: (a) a protocol must include return to all activity, including sport and school; (b) existing consensus-based adult protocols are not appropriate for children; and (c) a more conservative protocol is needed. After pilot testing, the developed protocol is being used across Ontario. CONCLUSION: Implementation of these new pediatric recommendations is an important addition to prevention of subsequent concussions during vulnerable recovery periods, with potential to facilitate recovery by preventing prolonged symptomatology, and secondary sequelae.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.119
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.144
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1190.144
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations35
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical PediatricsSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207