MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2594752435 · doi:10.1177/1941738117695777

Concussions in Community-Level Rugby: Risk, Knowledge, and Attitudes

2017· article· en· W2594752435 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSports Health A Multidisciplinary Approach · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of ManitobaPan Am Clinic
FundersPan Am Clinic Foundation
KeywordsMedicinePoison controlConcussionInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsSuicide preventionContext (archaeology)Occupational safety and healthFootballPhysical therapyMedical emergencyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Rugby is a popular collision sport where participants are at risk of sustaining concussions. Most research focuses on elite-level or youth divisions. Comparatively, little is known about adult community rugby. The aim of this research was to estimate the risk of sustaining a concussion during participation in community-level rugby and summarize the collective knowledge and attitudes toward concussions. HYPOTHESIS: Concussion symptoms will be reported frequently among community-level rugby players and a substantial proportion will report a willingness to continue participation despite the risk. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. METHODS: An anonymous, voluntary survey was administered to all 464 senior rugby players registered in the province of Manitoba in 2015. Two primary domains were assessed: (1) concussion history from the preceding season including occurrence, symptomatology, and impact on daily activities and (2) knowledge and attitudes toward concussion risks and management. RESULTS: In total, 284 (61.2%) rugby players responded. Concussive symptoms were reported by 106 (37.3%). Of those, 87% were formally diagnosed with a concussion and 27% missed school and/or work as a result. The danger of playing while symptomatic was recognized by 93.7% of participants, yet 29% indicated they would continue while symptomatic. Furthermore, 39% felt they were letting others down if they stopped playing due to a concussion. CONCLUSION: Concussive symptoms were common among the study cohort and had a notable impact on daily activities. A high proportion of players were willing to continue while experiencing symptoms despite recognizing the danger. The observed discord between knowledge and attitudes implicates a culture of "playing injured." CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding the risk of injury may affect an individual's decision to participate in community-level rugby. Moreover, evidence of discord between the knowledge and attitudes of players may direct future research initiatives and league governance.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.267 · 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