Comparison of SCAT-3 Baseline Testing and P300 ERP between Seasons in University Football Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Contact sport teams require their athletes to undergo baseline concussion testing for comparison to their post-concussion results. The standard test during this study was the Sport Concussion Assessment Tool-3rd edition (SCAT-3). Clinically used for return to play procedure, most athletes return to baseline scores 8-10 days’ post-concussion. Electroencephalography (EEG) is a non-invasive means of measuring the electro-physiological function of the brain. EEGs are the summative measure of Event-Related Potentials (ERPs) which are measures of brain activity after a specific event. P300 is an example of an ERP that is commonly used as a neurocognitive marker in concussion research. P300 can be further broken down into P3a and P3b, which relate to attention and decision making respectively. Using this technique, lasting functional deficits, beyond those that are highlighted on the SCAT-3 scores, have been noted. This study aims to evaluate the effect subconcussive impacts (SCI) have on SCAT-3 and electrophysiology from one season to the next in Canadian University football players over two seasons. Participants underwent standard SCAT-3 and EEG baseline testing at the beginning of two subsequent seasons. The EEG tests consist of two 5-minute baseline periods with eyes open and closed, followed by a 10-minute session collecting event-related potentials using a three-stimulus Oddball paradigm. Players mean scores showed increases in both number of symptoms (1±4.08) and symptom severity (1.9±6.6). Mean P3a and P3b latencies increased. Additionally, mean amplitudes decreased for both P3a and P3b. University Football players show physiological defects from accumulated SCI during a season. These deficits may accumulate each successive season without resolution. Due to their slow onset, evaluations of these changes are difficult identity. EEG measurements are sensitive to small changes in function and serve as an ideal tool to measure these changes. The SCAT-3 is less sensitive to these minor changes but still has value since it can be used acutely in sideline assessment of concussion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".