MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Injury patterns among female field hockey players

2001· article· en· W2108241257 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Murtaugh

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsField hockeyAnkleMedicinePhysical therapyTorsoInjury preventionSports medicinePoison controlPhysical medicine and rehabilitationFootballSurgeryMedical emergencyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To examine injury patterns among female field hockey players and to broaden the current base of knowledge by identifying the injury rates of different playing positions. It was hypothesized that goalkeepers would have the highest rate of injury, followed by forwards. METHODS: High school, university, and national level female field hockey players (N = 158) completed an anonymous questionnaire. They reported personal characteristics (age, height, weight); field hockey information (level, years of experience, surface); injury history (type, site, cause, severity); and back pain information. Injury rates were calculated per athlete-year. RESULTS: The most frequently injured site of the body was the lower limb (51%), followed by the head/face (34%), upper limb (14%), and torso (1%). The most prevalent types of injuries were ankle sprains, followed by hand fractures and head/face injuries. Goalkeepers had the highest rate of injury (0.58 injuries/athlete-year), whereas midfielders were the most injured field players (0.36 injuries/athlete-year). Back pain was reported by 59% of the sample, and the lower back was the most common site of this pain. CONCLUSION: There are differences in the rates of injury among playing positions in field hockey and in the types of acute injury sustained at each position. The high number of injuries to the head and face region is also cause for concern. Although most of these injuries are minor, the serious injuries that do occur can be very severe. Now that these patterns have been identified, further examination of the playing situations that lead to injury should be undertaken.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 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

Citations131
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207