Epidemiologic Analysis of Injury in Five Years of Canadian Professional Rodeo
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
Longitudinal studies of rodeo injuries are rare. We prospectively investigated injuries in professional rodeo in Canada over a 5-year period. Our specific interests included injury incidence density in specific rodeo events, risk factors such as past injury, and the incidence of head injury. Of 323 professional rodeos from 1995 through 1999, 63 rodeos provided a convenience sample. These rodeos were selected because the Canadian Professional Rodeo Sport Medicine Team was in attendance at these events, thus providing both competitor health care and data collection. Four hundred fifty-one injuries were reported during 30,564 competitor-exposures. The greatest injury frequency and injury incidence density were in the rough stock events (bull riding, bareback riding, and saddle bronc). Bull riding accounted for the greatest injury frequency (141) and incidence density (32.2 injuries per 1000 competitor-exposures). Bull riding had a relative injury risk of 1.32 when compared with bareback riding; bareback riding had a relative injury risk of 1.39 when compared with saddle bronc riding. Concussions accounted for 8.6% of all reported injuries. Concussions and other head injuries (65) were second only to knee injuries (76) in frequency of injury to specific body parts. This concussion frequency is higher than has previously been reported.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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