A History of Concussion Does Not Lead to an Increase in Ocular Near Point of Convergence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ocular near point of convergence (NPC) has been shown to be sensitive to the effects of concussion and subconcussive impacts. To determine if NPC is also sensitive to a previous history of concussion, male contact-sport athletes either with (n=26) or without (n=16) a history of at least one previous concussion had their NPC assessed. The results showed that participants with a history of concussion displayed NPC values (9.4±1.6 cm) indistinguishable from those with no history of concussion (8.4±2.1 cm, t-test, p=0.09). This was the case regardless of whether 1, 2, or 3 or more concussions had occurred and despite the fact participants with concussion (mean time since last concussion: 1136 days) suffered from an increased number and severity of symptoms as assessed with the SCAT 3 (3.6±2.2 vs. 2.13±1.89 symptoms, 6.1±4.1 vs. 3.19±2.99 severity, t-test, p<0.05). Taken together, these results imply that NPC may not be a suitable tool to assess the potential long-term effects of one or more concussions over a longer time frame.: Future research using larger sample sizes is warranted to evaluate the potential dose-response relationship between number of prior concussions and NPC.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".