Concussion and Concurrent Cognitive and Sport-specific Task Performance in Youth Ice Hockey Players: A Single-case Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Concussion is common in the sport of ice hockey and can cause deficits in cognitive function.In most situations, ice hockey participation requires the performance of more than one skill at a time.It has been reported that following concussion in athletes, performance deficits arise when locomotor and cognitive tasks are performed concurrently that may have otherwise gone unnoticed if assessed in isolation of one another.The purpose of this pilot study was to explore the effect of concussion on cognition during concurrent ice hockey specific tasks in youth ice hockey players.Methods: This single case pilot study compared the performance of 4 male youth ice hockey players who had experienced a concussion in the previous ice hockey season (mean age=11.7 ± 0.3 years; mean time since injury=92.5± 49.1 days) to a group of 10 non-injured controls (mean age=11.8± 0.8 years).Participants completed a randomized combination of three ice hockey specific tasks while concurrently completing a visual interference task (modified Stroop task).Results: Participants who experienced a concussion within the previous ice hockey season and were ≤ 58 days post-injury demonstrated significantly poorer cognitive performance (increased cognitive dual task cost) across all conditions when completing the visual interference task concurrently with ice hockey specific skills (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusion:This study acts as an initial step towards the development of a sport-specific assessment of functional performance following concussion in youth ice hockey players to help inform safer return to play.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".