Chiropractic utilization in BMX athletes at the UCI World Championships: a retrospective study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine paramedical (chiropractic, physiotherapy and massage therapy) utilization among high-level BMX athletes following sport-related injury at the 2007 UCI World Championships. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was conducted on a dataset from international male and female BMX athletes (n = 110) who sustained injury in training and competition at the 2007 BMX World Championships. RESULTS: Fifty percent of individuals aged 8-17 presented to a chiropractor versus 32% to physiotherapists and 18% to massage therapists. There was a significant difference in paramedical practitioner choice when comparing the sample across the different locations of injury. Specifically, the proportion of individuals presenting for treatment to chiropractors (84%) was much higher than to physiotherapists/massage therapists (16%) for spine or torso complaints. CONCLUSION: Utilization of chiropractors by BMX athletes may be higher than utilization of other paramedical professionals as suggested by this study. Chiropractors appear to be the paramedical practitioner of choice in regards to spine and torso related complaints.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".