MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553469580 · doi:10.1177/1460408616676503

The development of a threshold curve for the understanding of concussion in sport

2016· article· en· W2553469580 on OpenAlexaff
T. Blaine Hoshizaki, Andrew Post, M. Sue Kendall, Janie Cournoyer, Philippe Rousseau, Michael D. Gilchrist, Susan Brien, Michael D. Cusimano, Shawn Marshall

Bibliographic record

VenueTrauma · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionMedicineContext (archaeology)Traumatic brain injuryHead injuryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlInjury preventionSurgeryMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Much of what is known concerning human brain injury thresholds is based upon impacts to cadavers and animal models that were used to generate the Wayne State Concussion Tolerance Curve (WSTC) and similar curves. These curves are the foundation for predictive metrics used in standard development as well as helmet design. These curves were based upon a very narrow range of impacts; impacts whose characteristics differ greatly from how the head is impacted in sport. This research examines the uses of time-based curves like the WSTC in the context of understanding mechanisms of brain injury and head protection. Published linear/rotational acceleration magnitude/duration data from Hybrid III laboratory reconstructions of brain injury events were plotted. This research further develops the understanding of injury thresholds in comparison to threshold curves such as the WSTC and Brain Injury Curve Leuven. The data demonstrate the relationships between magnitude and duration of dynamic response on minor traumatic brain injury (mTBI) in sport.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.212
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations64
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraumaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207