MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400803067 · doi:10.1080/14763141.2016.1163414

Ice hockey shoulder pad design and the effect on head response during shoulder-to-head impacts

2016· article· en· W2400803067 on OpenAlexaff
Darrin Richards, Bodil Ivarsson, Irving S. Scher, Ryan Hoover, Kathleen Allen Rodowicz, Peter A. Cripton

Bibliographic record

VenueSports Biomechanics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutomotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHead (geology)Ice hockeyKinematicsOrthodonticsMedicineHybrid IIIPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlGeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ice hockey body checks involving direct shoulder-to-head contact frequently result in head injury. In the current study, we examined the effect of shoulder pad style on the likelihood of head injury from a shoulder-to-head check. Shoulder-to-head body checks were simulated by swinging a modified Hybrid-III anthropomorphic test device (ATD) with and without shoulder pads into a stationary Hybrid-III ATD at 21 km/h. Tests were conducted with three different styles of shoulder pads (traditional, integrated and tethered) and without shoulder pads for the purpose of control. Head response kinematics for the stationary ATD were measured. Compared to the case of no shoulder pads, the three different pad styles significantly (p < 0.05) reduced peak resultant linear head accelerations of the stationary ATD by 35-56%. The integrated shoulder pads reduced linear head accelerations by an additional 18-21% beyond the other two styles of shoulder pads. The data presented here suggest that shoulder pads can be designed to help protect the head of the struck player in a shoulder-to-head check.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSports BiomechanicsSame topicAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsFrench-language works237,207