Sport experience is correlated with complex motor skill recovery in youth following concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT A previous study showed prolonged cognitive–motor integration (CMI) deficits in youth with a history of concussion who were classified as asymptomatic by current return‐to‐play protocols, highlighting potential differences between clinical symptom recovery and skill recovery. The present study examines factors that may influence skilled performance recovery (defined as matching the skill level of no‐concussion history peers) post‐concussion in a similar cohort. Sixty‐four asymptomatic youth ( M = 13 yrs.) soccer, hockey, and lacrosse players with a concussion history ( M = 14 months post‐concussion) who returned to play and sixty‐two age‐matched team members with no previous concussion participated in this study. They performed two touchscreen‐based eye–hand coordination tasks, including a direct interaction and a CMI task. We analysed the relationship between CMI performance and concussion history, and whether age, sex, number of concussions, and years of sport experience in their sport affected skill recovery. Individuals with concussion history and higher amounts of sport experience (7–12 years) reached a performance level matching their no‐history peers quicker (after 12 months) than those with concussion history and lower sport experience (1–6 years; recovery after 30 months). This effect was independent of the number of concussions, age, and sex. The present results point towards an important role of eye–limb coordination‐related sport experience in functional CMI recovery post‐concussion. Youth with a concussion history but greater sport experience may have more skill‐related motor “reserve”. This reserve may directly aid in behavioural recovery post‐concussion, or the greater neurological efficiency associated with athletic experience provides a compensatory mechanism that provides faster functional recovery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".