Do measures of cervical, vestibulo-ocular function, balance and divided attention change over a year in youth ice hockey players?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To determine if preseason measures of cervical, vestibulo-ocular function, balance and divided attention change over one year in 10-12 year old ice hockey players. Design Prospective cohort study Setting Sport Injury Prevention Research Centre, Alberta, Canada Participants Youth Ice Hockey players (10-12 years old) who completed cervical, vestibular and divided attention tasks at a preseason assessment during two seasons of play. Outcome measures Numeric pain rating scores (neck pain, headache, dizziness), cervical flexor endurance test (CFE), cervical flexion rotation test (CFRT), anterolateral cervical spine strength, head perturbation test, functional gait assessment (FGA), walking while talking test, head thrust test and dynamic visual acuity (DVA). Main results A total of 193 uninjured youth ice hockey players [95% males; median age 11 (range 10-12) in the first season] completed preseason testing measures in two consecutive seasons (2013-2015). After Bonferroni corrections (α=0.0042), using Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test, anterolateral neck strength increased (right: z=−5.96, p<0.0001; left: z=−6.52, p<0.0001), head perturbation test improved (z=4.40, p<0.0001), walking while dividing attention improved (z=6.41, p<0.0001) and there were more positive head thrust tests (chi2=13.64, p=0.0034) in the second year. There was no evidence of a difference in symptom reports, CFE, CFRT, DVA and FGA between the two testing sessions. Conclusions Symptom reports did not differ between two years of play. However, tests of clinical function were different between two seasons of play in youth ice hockey players. These data suggest that developmental and/or maturational changes should be taking into consideration when interpreting these tests in youth. Competing interests None.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".