Proceedings from the Ice Hockey Summit on Concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this proceeding is to integrate the concussion in sport literature and sport science research on safety in ice hockey to develop an action plan to reduce the risk, incidence, severity, and consequences of concussion in ice hockey. METHODS: A rationale paper outlining a collaborative action plan to address concussions in hockey was posted for review two months prior to the Ice Hockey Summit: Action on Concussion. Focused presentations devoted specifically to concussion in ice hockey were presented during the Summit and breakout sessions were used to develop strategies to reduce concussion in the sport. This proceedings and a detailed scientific review (a matrix of solutions) were written to disseminate the evidence-based information and resulting concussion reduction strategies. The manuscripts were reviewed by the authors, advisors and contributors to ensure that the opinions and recommendations reflect the current level of knowledge on concussion in hockey. RESULTS: Six components of a potential solution were articulated in the Rationale paper and became the topics for breakout groups that followed the professional, scientific lectures. Topics that formed the core of the action plan were: metrics and databases; recognizing, managing and return to play; hockey equipment and ice arenas; prevention and education; rules and regulations; and expedient communication of the outcomes. The attendees in breakout sessions identified action items for each section. The most highly ranked action items were brought to a vote in the open assembly, using an Audience Response System (ARS). The strategic planning process was conducted to assess: Where are we at?; Where must we get to?; and What strategies are necessary to make progress on the prioritized action items? CONCLUSIONS: Three prioritized action items for each component of the solution and the percentage of the votes received are listed in the body of this proceeding.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".