Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder is associated with baseline child sport concussion assessment tool third edition scores in child hockey players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to report baseline, preseason data for the Child-SCAT3, stratified by attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) status, and examine group differences in Child-SCAT3 performance between children with and without ADHD. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: Young male hockey players (n = 304), aged 8-12 years, were administered the Child-SCAT3 during pre-season. Child-SCAT3 measures included a 20-item symptom scale, a Standardised Assessment of Concussion Child Version (SAC-C), a modified Balance Error Scoring System (m-BESS), a tandem gait task, and a coordination test. RESULTS: Children with ADHD (n = 20) endorsed significantly more symptoms (d = 0.95) and greater symptom severity (d = 1.13) compared to children without ADHD. No statistically significant differences were found between groups on Child-SCAT3 measures of cognitive or physical functioning (e.g. balance and coordination). CONCLUSIONS: ADHD should be considered when interpreting Child-SCAT3 scores, especially symptom reporting, in the context of concussion assessment. Better understanding of symptom reporting in uninjured child athletes with ADHD can inform the clinical interpretation of symptoms at baseline and following an actual or suspected concussion. Normative data for the Child-SCAT3 that is not stratified by or otherwise accounts for ADHD status should be used with caution when appraising performance of children with ADHD.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".