MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129096200

Effect of bodychecking on rate of injuries among minor hockey players.

2011· article· en· W2129096200 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael D. Cusimano, Nathan Taback, Steven McFaull, Ryan Hodgins, Tsegaye Bekele, Nada Elfeki

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIce hockeyOdds ratioEmergency departmentConfidence intervalInjury preventionLeaguePoison controlOccupational safety and healthDemographyPhysical therapyEmergency medicineInternal medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bodychecking is a leading cause of injury among minor hockey players. Its value has been the subject of heated debate since Hockey Canada introduced bodychecking for competitive players as young as 9 years in the 1998/1999 season. Our goal was to determine whether lowering the legal age of bodychecking from 11 to 9 years affected the numbers of all hockey-related injuries and of those specifically related to bodychecking among minor hockey players in Ontario. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we evaluated data collected through the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program. The study's participants were male hockey league players aged 6-17 years who visited the emergency departments of 5 hospitals in Ontario for hockey-related injuries during 10 hockey seasons (September 1994 to May 2004). Injuries were classified as bodychecking-related or non-bodychecking-related. Injuries that occurred after the rule change took effect were compared with those that occurred before the rule's introduction. RESULTS: During the study period, a total of 8552 hockey-related injuries were reported, 4460 (52.2%) of which were attributable to bodychecking. The odds ratio (OR) of a visit to the emergency department because of a bodychecking-related injury increased after the rule change (OR 1.26, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.38), the head and neck (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.26-1.84) and the shoulder and arm (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.04-1.35) being the body parts with the most substantial increases in injury rate. The OR of an emergency visit because of concussion increased significantly in the Atom division after the rule change, which allowed bodychecking in the Atom division. After the rule change, the odds of a bodychecking-related injury was significantly higher in the Atom division (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.70-2.84). INTERPRETATION: In this study, the odds of injury increased with decreasing age of exposure to bodychecking. These findings add to the growing evidence that bodychecking holds greater risk than benefit for youth and support widespread calls to ban this practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.311
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations50
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207