PA 03-1-0758 Implementing concussion best practice in canadian sport: the concussion protocol harmonization project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport participation is a common cause of head injuries, especially in youth. In Canada, sport activities are the third leading cause of traumatic brain injury hospital admissions (Impact, 2013). In recent years, increasing attention on concussions has led to an increase in concussion resources, with less focus on a harmonized or standardized evidence-based information. Based on the need for a common approach to concussion recognition and management, Parachute led the development of national concussion guidelines and protocols to better equip athletes, coaches, parents, educators, and medical professionals. The purpose of the project is to improve consistency in concussion recognition and management across Canada by providing evidence-based best practice guidance and policy support to National Sport Organizations (NSOs). Using the 5th International Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport and the expertise from Canada’s leaders in concussion, Parachute created and disseminated the first-ever Canadian Guideline on Concussion in Sport in 2017. To increase the resource’s uptake in Canada’s sport system, Parachute worked directly with NSOs to develop updated concussion protocols and Return-to-Sport Strategies. Knowledge translations strategies included educational opportunities, practice tools, templates and resources, digital technology, traditional media, and social media. To date, more than 30 NSOs are directly applying the Canadian Guideline on Concussion in Sport to their concussion protocols. Project success has been attributed to: cross-sector collaboration between health and sport; government buy-in; efforts to understand the heterogenous contexts, capacities, and needs of sport organizations; and the development of audience-specific tools to improve self-efficacy for sport organizations in the field of concussion policy. The harmonization of sport-specific protocols across the country aims to positively affect the health of active Canadians by clearly defining processes for better concussions management, and ultimately reducing the long-term impact of concussions.
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 | 0.123 | 0.137 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.012 |
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".