MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145494860 · doi:10.1136/bjsm.36.1.15

Banning pregnant netballers—is this the answer?

2002· article· en· W2145494860 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Susan J. White

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of PittsburghInternational Olympic CommitteeMcGill UniversityNorthwestern University
KeywordsOutrageCommissionSympathyPolitical scienceAbortionMedicinePregnancyLawPsychologyPublic relationsPoliticsPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

n November 2001, the first International Symposium on Concussion in Sport was held in Vienna, Austria.This symposium was organised by the International Ice Hockey Federation (IIHF), the Federation Internationale de Football Association Medical Assessment and Research Centre (FIFA, F-MARC), and the International Olympic Committee Medical Commission (IOC).The aim of the symposium was to provide recommendations for the improvement of safety and health of athletes who suffer concussive injuries in ice hockey, football (soccer), and other sports.To this end a range of experts were invited to address specific issues of epidemiology, basic and clinical science, grading systems, cognitive assessment, new research methods, protective equipment, management, prevention, and long term outcome, and to discuss a unitary model for understanding concussive injury.At the conclusion of the conference, a small group of experts were given a mandate by the conference delegates and organising bodies to draft a document describing the agreement position reached by those in attendance at that meeting.For the purpose of this paper, this group will be called the Concussion in Sport Group (CISG).Concussion in 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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0090.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.004

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207