A prospective study of concussion education in 2 junior ice hockey teams: implications for sports concussion education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an educational intervention on concussion knowledge within a sample of junior fourth-tier ice hockey players. METHODS: A prospective cohort study, called the Hockey Concussion Education Project, was conducted during 1 junior ice hockey regular season (2009-2010) with 67 male fourth-tier ice hockey players (mean age 18.2 ± 1.2 years, range 16-21 years) from 2 teams. All participating players were randomized into 3 concussion education intervention groups (DVD group, interactive computer module [ICM] group, or control group) before the beginning of the season. Each individual received a preintervention knowledge test prior to the intervention. The DVD and ICM groups received a posttest after the completion of their intervention. All participants were offered the same knowledge test at 15 games (50 days) and 30 games (91 days) later. RESULTS: In the concussion education intervention component no significant group differences were observed at baseline between individuals in the control group and between individuals within the interventional group. At the 15-game follow-up, however, the difference between groups approached significance (F [1, 30] = 3.91, p = 0.057). This group difference remained consistent at the 30-game follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a positive trend concerning concussion education intervention and knowledge acquisition with either the ICMs or the educational DVD. Both forms of intervention produced a positive and sustainable improvement that approached statistical significance when compared with the control group. The control group demonstrated a negative longitudinal trend concerning concussion knowledge.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".