Earlier time to aerobic exercise is associated with faster recovery following acute sport concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether earlier time to initiation of aerobic exercise following acute concussion is associated with time to full return to (1) sport and (2) school or work. METHODS: A retrospective stratified propensity score survival analysis of acute (≤14 days) concussion was used to determine whether time (days) to initiation of aerobic exercise post-concussion was associated with, both, time (days) to full return to (1) sport and (2) school or work. RESULTS: A total of 253 acute concussions [median (IQR) age, 17.0 (15.0-20.0) years; 148 (58.5%) males] were included in this study. Multivariate Cox regression models identified that earlier time to aerobic exercise was associated with faster return to sport and school/work adjusting for other covariates, including quintile propensity strata. For each successive day in delay to initiation of aerobic exercise, individuals had a less favourable recovery trajectory. Initiating aerobic exercise at 3 and 7 days following injury was associated with a respective 36.5% (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.53-0.76) and 73.2% (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.16-0.45) reduced probability of faster full return to sport compared to within 1 day; and a respective 45.9% (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.44-0.66) and 83.1% (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.10-0.30) reduced probability of faster full return to school/work. Additionally, concussion history, symptom severity, LOC deleteriously influenced concussion recovery. CONCLUSION: Earlier initiation of aerobic exercise was associated with faster full return to sport and school or work. This study provides greater insight into the benefits and safety of aerobic exercise within the first week of the injury.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".