Consequences of Traumatic Brain Injury in Professional American Football Players: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature for the consequences Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has on cognitive, psychological, physical, and sports-related functioning in professional American Football players. DATA SOURCES: We performed a systematic search in 2 databases, PubMed and SPORTDiscus, to obtain literature from January 1990 to January 2015. To be eligible for inclusion, a study had to examine the relationship between TBI and the consequences for several aspects of functioning in professional American football players older than 18 years. Methodological quality was assessed using a 5-item checklist which assessed selection bias, information bias, and correct reporting of the population and exposure characteristics. MAIN RESULTS: The search yielded 21 studies that met our inclusion criteria. An evidence synthesis was performed on the extracted data and resulted in 5 levels of evidence. The evidence synthesis revealed that there is strong evidence that concussions are associated with late-life depression and short-term physical dysfunctions. Evidence for the relationship between concussion and impaired sports-related function, prolonged reaction time, memory impairment, and visual-motor speed was inconclusive. Moderate evidence was found for the association between TBI and mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and limited evidence was found for the association between TBI and executive dysfunction. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence that a history of concussion in American football players is associated with depression later in life and short-term physical dysfunctions. Also cognitive dysfunctions such as MCI are seen in older players with a history of TBI. These results provide input for actions to prevent TBI and their consequences in (retired) American football players.
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 | 0.008 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".