Visuomotor deficits during locomotion in previously concussed athletes 30 or more days following return to play
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
Current protocols for returning athletes to play (RTP) center around resolution of physical symptoms of concussion. However, recent research has identified that balance and cognitive deficits persist beyond physical symptom recovery. Protocols that involve testing dynamic balance and visuomotor integration have been recommended as potential tools for better understanding of length of impairment following concussion. A dynamic, visuomotor paradigm was undertaken in the current study to assess decision making in athletes who had sustained a concussion >30 days before study participation and had been cleared to RTP (N = 10). Two obstacles created a gap that varied between 0.6 and 1.8× participants' individual shoulder width in open space. Participants made decisions to navigate through or deviate around the gap created by the two obstacles. The results revealed that previously concussed athletes were highly variable in their decision making and demonstrated variable Medial-Lateral (ML) center of mass (COM) control when approaching the obstacles, when compared with nonconcussed, age-matched controls. As such, they showed poor visuomotor control and decision making, as well as poor dynamic stability compared to controls. Visuomotor deficits were persistent in the sample of previously concussed individuals, well beyond deficits identified by current RTP standards. This study suggests that dynamic, visuomotor integration tasks may be of benefit to increase rigor in RTP protocols and increase safety of athletes returning to sport.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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