Effects of Competition Rule Changes on the Incidence of Head Kicks and Possible Concussions in Taekwondo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Competition rules related to head kicks (HKs) in sparing-taekwondo (S-TKD) were changed in 2009, resulting in more points awarded to the head attacker. The objective of this research is to measure the incidence of HKs and to analyze the characteristics of situations leading up to and after HKs in a postrule change competition. DESIGN: Descriptive epidemiology study using video analysis. SETTING: The final matches of the World Taekwondo Championships (WTCs) in 2011 and 2013. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1760 athletes participated in both WTCs. Sixty-four athletes, who had won elimination-round matches and were 15 years or older, competed in final matches. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The final matches-a total of 64 matches including 95 rounds-were analyzed using an anatomical and outcome coding scheme for HKs. RESULTS: Overall, a total of 30 athletes experienced receiving one or more HKs during 2 WTCs (469 HKs per 1000 athlete-exposures (A-E), 95% confidence interval = 296, 642). Female athletes showed higher incidences of HKs than male. A trend of increasing incidence of HKs was observed in the females. The HKs occurred more frequently among competitors in lightweight categories and those of similar height (49%). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the frequency of HKs seems to have increased compared with matches before 2009. A sharp increase in the numbers of HKs is evident among the elite female athletes. To prevent receiving an HK, updated game strategies such as training for blocking skills, and safety guidelines for HKs, or revisions to rules are needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The recent changes to competition rules promoting the use of HKs may have resulted in an increasing frequency of HKs compared with research findings before these changes. Multiple HKs occur frequently in S-TKD; care needs to be taken to avoid possible acute/chronic consequences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".