Possible Concussions Following Head Blows in the 2001 Canadian National Taekwondo Championships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blows to the head and face occur commonly in competition Taekwondo. However, limited research has been done on head blows, particularly those that may result in concussion in competition Taekwondo. Therefore, the purposes of this study were to study the incidence and characteristics of head blow and concussion, and, through visual analysis of competition videotapes, to examine the situational and contextual factors surrounding head blows, with a view to making recommendations that might reduce their frequency. A prospective design with direct observation, interview and videotape recording was used. A total of 212 Canadian competitors (139 males and 73 females) participated in this tournament and ranged in age from 14-24 years. The incidence of head blows and concussions was 273 and 53 per 1,000 athlete-exposures, respectively. None of the head blow recipients lost consciousness following impact to the head. Concussions occur more commonly when competitors adopt a closed sparring stance, and use a roundhouse kick. The most frequent site of impact is the temporal region of the head. In conclusion, the incidence of concussion and head blows is high in competition Taekwondo. This could be decreased with improved skill in blocking kicks to the head and face. 1
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".