MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904196588 · doi:10.4085/1062-6050-7-18

Randomized Controlled Trial Evaluating Aerobic Training and Common Sport-Related Concussion Outcomes in Healthy Participants

2018· article· en· W2904196588 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth F. Teel, Johna K. Register‐Mihalik, Lawrence G. Appelbaum, Cláudio L. Battaglini, Kevin A. Carneiro, Kevin M. Guskiewicz, Stephen W. Marshall, Jason P. Mihalik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Athletic Training · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
KeywordsPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialAerobic exerciseConcussionMedicineRehabilitationPsychological interventionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlInjury preventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context Aerobic exercise interventions are increasingly being prescribed for concussion rehabilitation, but whether aerobic training protocols influence clinical concussion diagnosis and management assessments is unknown. Objective To investigate the effects of a brief aerobic exercise intervention on clinical concussion outcomes in healthy, active participants. Design Randomized controlled clinical trial. Setting Laboratory. Patients or Other Participants Healthy (uninjured) participants (n = 40) who exercised ≥3 times/week. Intervention(s) Participants were randomized into the acute concussion therapy intervention (ACTIVE) training or nontraining group. All participants completed symptom, cognitive, balance, and vision assessments during 2 test sessions approximately 14 days apart. Participants randomized to ACTIVE training completed six 30-minute exercise sessions that progressed from 60% to 80% of individualized maximal oxygen consumption (V˙o2max) across test sessions, while the nontraining group received no intervention. Main Outcome Measure(s) The CNS Vital Signs standardized scores, Vestibular/Ocular Motor Screening near-point convergence distance (cm), and Graded Symptom Checklist, Balance Error Scoring System, and Standardized Assessment of Concussion total scores. Results An interaction effect was found for total symptom score (P = .01); the intervention group had improved symptom scores between sessions (session 1: 5.1 ± 5.8; session 2: 1.9 ± 3.6). Cognitive flexibility, executive functioning, reasoning, and total symptom score outcomes were better but composite memory, verbal memory, and near-point convergence distance scores were worse at the second session (all P values < .05). However, few changes exceeded the 80% reliable change indices calculated for this study, and effect sizes were generally small to negligible. Conclusions A brief aerobic training protocol had few meaningful effects on clinical concussion assessment in healthy participants, suggesting that current concussion-diagnostic and -assessment tools remain clinically stable in response to aerobic exercise training. This provides normative data for future researchers, who should further evaluate the effect of ACTIVE training on clinical outcomes among concussed populations. Trial Registration Number ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02872480

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.906

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.207
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Athletic TrainingSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207