Academic outcomes following adolescent sport-related concussion or fracture injury: A prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives were 1) to compare the effects of adolescent sport-related concussion (SRC) and sport-related extremity fracture (SRF) on academic outcomes including change in school grades and school attendance; and 2) to determine which specific academic accommodations were most helpful during recovery from these injuries. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted to compare changes in school grades, school attendance and academic accommodations among students (grades 8-12) with an SRC or SRF. School grades were extracted from student immediate pre- and post-injury report cards. Students completed attendance log books and an exit interview to determine which accommodations were helpful and how accommodating they perceived their school to be during their recovery. RESULTS: Overall, 124 students (92 with SRC and 32 with SRF) submitted both pre- and post-injury report cards. Students who sustained an SRC or SRF experienced similar decreases in grades post-injury (SRC: -1.0%; 95% CI: -2.1, 0.1 and SRF: -0.9%: 95% CI: -2.1, 0.3). Students with an SRC missed significantly more days of school compared to those with an SRF (median of 4 days [IQR: 1, 7] versus 1 day [IQR: 0, 4], p<0.0001). In total, 60/113 (53.1%) SRC students reported their school to be very accommodating while only 31/77 (40.3%) SRF students reported their school to be very accommodating (p = 0.082). CONCLUSIONS: Students who sustain an SRC miss significantly more days of school but demonstrate similar changes in school grades post-injury compared to those with an SRF. Future studies are needed to identify the pre- and post-injury factors associated with poor academic functioning following concussion and identify measures that can be taken to help optimize academic outcomes in these patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".