MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2272609054 · doi:10.22059/jsmed.2014.51487

بررسی ارتباط مهارت های روانی با آسیب بازیکنان فوتبال تیم های تهرانی لیگ برتر ایران

2014· article· fa· W2272609054 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
کریم بیگلر, محمدحسین علیزاده, محمد خبیری

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefa
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueFootballAnxietyPsychologyClinical psychologyIncidence (geometry)Psychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Numerous empirical studies suggest that specific psychological factors influence the frequency and severity of sport injuries. Method: The aim of present study was to examine the relationship between fundamental psychological skills, psycho-somatic skills, cognitive skills and incidence of injuries in football players of Tehran premier league. 108 players from four teams of Iran premier league participated in the study. Research data was collected by injury report form and Ottawa mental skills assessment tool-3. Pearson correlation test at significant level of 95% were used for analyzing the data. Result: Results indicated that 89.5% of players experienced at least one injury during one season which 90.7 % of them resulted in 1-3 days missing of match or training. The findings also indicated that in football players of premier league there is inverse and significant relationship between psychological skills (p=0/0001) and its subdivisions including fundamental psychological skills (p=0/006), psycho-somatic skills (p=0/0001), cognitive skills (p=0/0001) and incidence of sport injuries. Conclusion: The findings of present study show that having high levels of psychological skills helps premier league players to handle stressful situations in sports through enhancing self-confidence and other psychological factors confronting harmful psychological factors such as stress and anxiety and lead to decrease in injury incidence. Thus officials, coaches, physicians and sport psychologists are recommended to educate essential psychological skills.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.008

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 head0.283
GPT teacher head0.607
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicHealth and Well-being Studies→French-language works237,207→