The Child Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (Child SCAT3): normative values and correspondence between child and parent symptom scores in male child athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children and youth are at increased risk of sustaining sport-related concussions. There is a need to develop age-specific tools to evaluate the effects of concussion. The objective of this study was to determine normative values for the Child Sport Concussion Assessment Tool (Child SCAT3) in child athletes and evaluate the symptom scoring agreement between the child and parent. METHODS: Child SCAT3 was administered to ice hockey players enrolled in a regional minor hockey association. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate the differences between child and parent reporting as well as those based on age. RESULTS: 227 athletes (7-12 years of age) completed the Child SCAT3. 29 players reported a history of concussion. For the objective components, the average total Standard Assessment of Concussion adapted to a child version (SAC-C) score of 24.4 was made up by orientation (3.7), immediate memory (12.9), concentration (3.8) and delayed recall (3.9) sections. Average errors in the modified Balance Error Scoring System (BESS) were 1.6, tandem gait time 14.9 s and coordination score 0.95. For the subjective component, children reported an average of eight symptoms and a severity of 11; parents reported seven symptoms with a severity of 9. Overall, children reported higher symptom severity in comparison with their parents. In addition, parents significantly underestimated both physical and sleep-related symptoms in comparison with the children's scores. CONCLUSIONS: Results provide representative scores for the Child SCAT3 in young male ice hockey players. Clinicians should be aware that parents tend to underestimate their child's symptoms and symptom severity, particularly in the domains of physical symptoms and sleep. Encouraging objective symptom documentation with sleep or pain diaries, for example, may be useful for reliable clinical assessment in this age group.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".