MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594472340 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2016-097441

What are the critical elements of sideline screening that can be used to establish the diagnosis of concussion? A systematic review

2017· review· en· W2594472340 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jon Patricios, Gordon Fuller, Richard Ellenbogen, Stanley A. Herring, Jeffrey S. Kutcher, Mike Loosemore, Michael Makdissi, Michael McCrea, Margot Putukian, Kathryn Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Sports Medicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsConcussionMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineInjury preventionPoison controlMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sideline detection is the first and most significant step in recognising a potential concussion and removing an athlete from harm. This systematic review aims to evaluate the critical elements aiding sideline recognition of potential concussions including screening tools, technologies and integrated assessment protocols. DATA SOURCES: Bibliographic databases, grey literature repositories and relevant websites were searched from 1 January 2000 to 30 September 2016. A total of 3562 articles were identified. STUDY SELECTION: Original research studies evaluating a sideline tool, technology or protocol for sports-related concussion were eligible, of which 27 studies were included. DATA EXTRACTION: A standardised form was used to record information. The QUADAS-2 and Newcastle-Ottawa tools were used to rate risk of bias. Strength of evidence was assessed using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group system. DATA SYNTHESIS: Studies assessing symptoms, the King-Devick test and multimodal assessments reported high sensitivity and specificity. Evaluations of balance and cognitive tests described lower sensitivity but higher specificity. However, these studies were at high risk of bias and the overall strength of evidence examining sideline screening tools was very low. A strong body of evidence demonstrated that head impact sensors did not provide useful sideline concussion information. Low-strength evidence suggested a multimodal, multitime-based concussion evaluation process incorporating video review was important in the recognition of significant head impact events and delayed onset concussion. CONCLUSION: In the absence of definitive evidence confirming the diagnostic accuracy of sideline screening tests, consensus-derived multimodal assessment tools, such as the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool, are recommended. Sideline video review may improve recognition and removal from play of athletes who have sustained significant head impact events. Current evidence does not support the use of impact sensor systems for real-time concussion identification.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.285
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations123
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207