Approach to investigation and treatment of persistent symptoms following sport-related concussion: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the literature regarding assessment and treatment modalities in patients with persistent symptoms following sport-related concussion (SRC). DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline, Embase, SPORTSDiscus, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane library and ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Global electronic databases. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were included if they were original research, reported on SRC as the primary source of injury, included patients with persistent postconcussive symptoms (>10 days) and investigated the role of assessment or treatment modalities. RESULTS: Of 3225 articles identified in the preliminary search, 25 articles met the inclusion criteria. 11 articles were concerned with assessment and 14 articles with treatment of persistent symptoms following SRC. There were three randomised control trials and one quasi-experimental study. The remainder consisting of cross-sectional studies, historical cohorts and case series. SUMMARY: 'Persistent symptoms' following SRC can be defined as clinical recovery that falls outside expected time frames (ie, >10-14 days in adults and >4 weeks in children). It does not reflect a single pathophysiological entity, but describes a constellation of non-specific post-traumatic symptoms that may be linked to coexisting and/or confounding pathologies. A detailed multimodal clinical assessment is required to identify specific primary and secondary processes, and treatment should target specific pathologies identified. There is preliminary evidence supporting the use of symptom-limited aerobic exercise, targeted physical therapy and a collaborative approach that includes cognitive behavioural therapy. Management of patients with persistent symptoms is challenging and should occur in a multidisciplinary collaborative setting, with healthcare providers with experience in SRC.
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 | 0.014 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".