MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120314190 · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-795

Characteristics of martial art injuries in a defined Canadian population: a descriptive epidemiological study

2010· article· en· W2120314190 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mark McPherson, William Pickett

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMartial Arts: Techniques, Psychology, and Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsMedicineMartial artsEpidemiologyBiostatisticsInjury preventionPoison controlPopulationOccupational safety and healthCensusDemographyIncidence (geometry)Suicide preventionPsychological interventionEnvironmental healthPathologyGeographyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The martial arts have emerged as common activities in the Canadian population, yet few studies have investigated the occurrence of associated injuries on a population basis. METHODS: We performed such an investigation and suggest potential opportunities for prevention. The data source was 14 years (1993 to 2006) of records from the Kingston sites of the Canadian Hospital Injury Reporting and Prevention Program (CHIRPP). RESULTS: 920 cases were identified. Incidence rates were initially estimated using census data as denominators. We then imputed annual injury rates per 10000 using a range of published estimates of martial arts participation available from a national survey. Rates of injury in males and females were 2300 and 1033 per 10000 (0.3% participation) and 575 and 258 per 10000 (1.2% participation). Injuries were most frequently reported in karate (33%) and taekwondo (14%). The most common mechanisms of injury were falls, throws and jumps (33%). Fractures (20%) were the most frequently reported type of injury and the lower limb was the most common site of injury (41%). CONCLUSIONS: Results provide a foundation for potential interventions with a focus on falls, the use of weapons, participation in tournaments, as well as head and neck trauma.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

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

Citations57
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicMartial Arts: Techniques, Psychology, and EducationFrench-language works237,207