Consistency of Self-Reported Concussion History in Adolescent Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relying on self-reported concussion injury history is common in both clinical care and research. However, young athletes may not provide consistent medical information. To date, little is known about the reliability of self-reported concussion history in high school students. This study examined whether student athletes reported their lifetime history of concussions consistently over time. Self-reported concussion history was examined in 4792 student athletes (ages 13–18) from Maine who completed a preseason health survey on two occasions (median re-test interval = 23.7 months; standard deviation = 7.3; interquartile range = 12.4–24.5). Consistency of self-reported concussion history was determined by differences in the number of concussions reported during the second survey. Inconsistent concussion history was defined primarily by a decrease in the number of lifetime concussions reported at the second testing, compared with at the first testing. The majority of the sample (80.3%) reported no change in the number of concussions between the two baseline assessments. A minority (15.9%; n = 763) reported more concussions during the second assessment. Only 3.8% ( n = 181) of student athletes provided inconsistent concussion histories, defined as fewer concussions at the second assessment. Boys provided inconsistent concussion histories a little more frequently, compared with girls (5.3% and 2.0%, respectively; p < 0.001). Similarly, athletes with self-reported attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) provided inconsistent concussion histories somewhat more frequently, compared with those without ADHD (7.8% and 3.5%, respectively; p < 0.001). Of the athletes with inconsistent concussion histories, greater degree of inconsistency was associated with a greater number of concussions initially reported at baseline ( r s = 0.54; p < 0.001). Only a small proportion of student athletes provided inconsistent concussion histories. Male gender, ADHD, and greater number of baseline concussions were significantly associated with inconsistency in reporting. Overall, these findings suggest that student athletes are quite consistent when reporting their concussion history when surveyed twice during high school.
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".