MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510259060 · doi:10.1123/ijatt.2016-0005

Frequency and Magnitude of Head Accelerations in a Canadian Interuniversity Sport Football Team’s Training Camp and Season

2016· article· en· W2510259060 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel P. Muise, Sasho MacKenzie, Tara M. Sutherland

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Athletic Therapy & Training · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionOffensiveFootballCollege footballAmerican footballFootball playersPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyInjury preventionPoison controlMedicineMedical emergencyEngineeringGeographyOperations research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increased awareness of concussion in sport has led to an examination of head impacts and the associated biomechanics that occur during these sporting events. The high rate of concussions in football makes it particularly relevant.1 The purpose of this study was to examine how frequently, and to what magnitude, Canadian University football players get hit in training camp and how this compares to practices and games in regular season. An ANOVA with repeated measures indicated that, on average, players were hit significantly more in games (45.2 hits) than training camp sessions (17.7 hits) and practices (8.0 hits), while training camp was associated with significantly more hits than practices (p < .001, η2 = .392). Multiple positional differences were found. In particular, significantly more hits were experienced by offensive linemen (36.7 hits) and defensive linemen (31.6 hits) compared with all other positions (p < .001, η2 = .247). Study outcomes determined players/positions most at risk for concussion due to head impacts, which is beneficial in forming concussion prevention and assessment strategies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Athletic Therapy & TrainingSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207