Risk Factors for Injuries in Competitive Irish Dancers Enrolled in Dance Schools in Calgary, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Irish dancing has become a popular activity following international exposure to touring dance companies. Previous studies have reported high injury incidence rates in dancers. The objective of this study was to examine risk factors for injuries in competitive Irish dancers in Calgary, Canada. DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study. Competitive dancers over 12 years of age in Calgary, Canada, were eligible to participate. METHODS: A pen-and-paper survey was administered to gather information on demographics, risk factors for injury, and injuries in the past year. Potential risk factors included age, competitive level, participation in other physical activities, years of participation in Irish dance, and performing a warm-up or cool-down. Incidence proportions (IP) and odds ratios (OR) were estimated. RESULTS: Three of the five accredited dance schools in Calgary participated and a total of 36 questionnaires were completed. Twenty-six dancers (IP=72.2%; 95% CI 54.8-85.8%) reported at least one Irish dance-related injury in the past year. There were 60 injuries reported and the majority (57%) were foot or ankle injuries. Elite level dancers (OR= 6.33; CI 1.27-31.57) and dancers over 18 years of age (OR= 24.43; CI 2.60-229.56) were at greater risk of injury in the past year than non-elite and younger dancers. CONCLUSIONS: Elite dancers and dancers over 18 years of age are at the greatest risk of injury in Irish dance in Calgary, Canada.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".