MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Quantifying Balance Control in Concussed Varsity Athletes

2015· article· en· W2465551839 on OpenAlexaff
Brett Reaume, Mike Cinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesBalance (ability)GaitPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyPhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has demonstrated that even at return to play (RTP), there are continued balance control deficits in previously concussed athletes. However, these deficits were only distinguishable using higher order measures, which might have been missed using traditional measures (Powers et al., 2013). Higher-order analyses provide better insights into the neural control of balance. Sparato and colleagues (2013) quantified the number of lateral posture adjustments (PA) during a stepping task and found young adults tend to elicit one PA whereas older adults with history of falls tended to use two. PURPOSE: To determine whether a PA measure can distinguish control differences between groups of young adults during gait initiation (GI) task. HYPOTHESIS: During GI, concussed individuals will make more PA than non-athletes and baseline athletes, respectively. METHOD: Participants were all females (17-24 years) and included: varsity soccer players (N=28, baseline), non-athletes (N=6), and concussed soccer players during the symptomatic phase (N=3). Participants were asked to stand quietly on a Bertec force plate (FP) with their feet together and hands by their sides with their eyes open or closed for 45s. After 45s, an auditory cue sounded and participants initiated gait from the FP by taking two steps. Postural adjustments made during the gait initiation phase were calculated using the vertical force and counting the number of inflection points from the start of GI to when the participants were completely off the FP. Participants were taken from three groups: Baseline Female Laurier Varsity Soccer Players, Non-Athletes, and Concussed Varsity Athletes at the asymptomatic and RTP stage of recovery. RESULTS: During eyes open, non-athletes made more PA than the baseline athletes (p=.034) but concussed soccer players were not different from the baseline athletes (p=.13). With eyes closed, all participants produced similar number of PA. CONCLUSSION: These preliminary findings suggest that a PA measurement during GI can distinguish athletes from non-athletes and hopefully with more concussed athlete participants, may be able to distinguish between concussed and non-concussed athletes. If this is true, this would be an effective measure to not only determine if an athlete is concussed, but also to determine if the concussed athlete is ready to return to activity.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→