Social Influences on Return to Play Following Concussion in Female Competitive Youth Ice Hockey Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to the increasing rates of concussions in youth sport, there has been a heightened interest in the physiological and psychological effects of concussions on young athletes (Stein & Meehan, 2014). However, little is known about the potential influence of significant others (i.e., parents, coaches, trainers, teammates, siblings) on young athletes during the Return to Play (RTP) process following a sport-related concussion. The purpose of this study was to examine the social influences on female youth ice hockey players RTP following a concussion. Using a phenomenological approach, five female competitive youth ice hockey players ( M age =12.2) were interviewed to gain insight into their experiences with concussions (e.g., emotions, feelings) and the RTP process (e.g., who influenced the decision to return). Coaches, teammates, and teachers were perceived as sources of positive influence, while siblings were identified as negative social influences. Parents were found to be positive and negative influences in the RTP process. Study findings support the on-going significance of concussion management education systems (e.g., Heads Up, Think First) for coaches, trainers, athletes, teachers and parents.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".