Psychological predictors of injuries in circus artists: an exploratory study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the relationship between potential psychological risk factors and injury risk in circus artists. DESIGN: Historical cohort study. SETTING: Cirque du Soleil training programme. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-seven circus artists training to become Cirque du Soleil artists. ASSESSMENT OF RISK FACTORS: Artists completed the validated REST-Q questionnaire (19 domains) during their first 2 weeks of training. MAIN OUTCOME: Injury risk ratio. RESULTS: Of the five a priori exposures of interest, injury, emotional exhaustion, self-efficacy and fatigue were associated with an increase in injury risk (risk ratios between 1.8 and 2.8), but Conflicts/Pressure was not (risk ratio=0.8). Of the several specific psychological aspects that are considered risk factors for injury, low self-efficacy had the strongest relationship. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the strong psychological risk factors for injuries previously identified in athletes also appear to be risk factors in circus artists.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it