Knowledge, attitudes and practices in paediatricpediatric concussion: informing research, education and clinical care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices surrounding research, education and clinical care in paediatric concussion at One Voice: the 1st International Symposium on Paediatric Concussion. Design Quantitative, cross sectional, one-group survey design. Setting One Voice: the 1st International Symposium on Paediatric Concussion. Participants Sixty-two international paediatric concussion leaders representing a multi-stakeholder group. Intervention None. Outcome measures A survey was designed to assess self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and practices surrounding paediatric concussion research, education, and clinical care. Main results Participants identified knowledge gaps as an issue across different groups including athletes and coaches. Attitude towards concussion in the sport culture was recognised as a barrier to common issues such as under reporting and playing while symptomatic. Stakeholders also identified that healthcare professionals do not have adequate training to diagnose and manage paediatric concussion, and highlighted the need for additional knowledge and streamlined education to enhance clinical practices. Conclusions Knowledge, attitude and practice gaps in paediatric concussion exist across various stakeholder groups, leading to inconsistencies in concussion care and a lack of concussion recognition and reporting. Survey results align with outcomes identified in the literature. One Voice stakeholders underscored the value of education in enhancing knowledge, and its role in shifting attitude and optimising practices in paediatric concussion: identification, management and prevention. These outcomes will inform research, education and clinical initiatives to best meet the needs of the paediatric concussion community. 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 | 0.026 | 0.096 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".