MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factors Influencing Coaches’ Decisions about Concussion on the Sidelines of Youth Sports

2019· article· en· W2978314678 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ann Guernon, Christina Papdimitriou

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsConcussionPsychologyField hockeyApplied psychologyAthletesGrounded theoryMedical educationRecreationLegislationYouth sportsQualitative researchFootballPoison controlInjury preventionMedicinePhysical therapyPolitical scienceMedical emergencySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Identify coach reported factors influencing decisions about potential concussion in youth sports. Background Youth concussion in sport is an established public health concern. Coaches are the primary stakeholders deciding about removal from play for suspected concussion on the sidelines of competition and practice in most youth sports organizations. Estimates indicate over 2 million adults coach youth sports. Legislation across the U.S. and guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and the Concussion in Sport Group recommend players with suspected concussion be removed from play and not return prior to medical clearance and a graduated return to play protocol be followed. Design/Methods Qualitative semi-structured 1:1 interviews with coaches of youth community or school sponsored athletic programs in Illinois. Interview data was analyzed according to a constructivist grounded theory methodology employing constant comparative methods with an inductive approach to theme emergence. Results Sixteen coaches of recreational, competitive and scholastic athletic teams participated. Coaches were primarily white (94%) males (81%) with an average age of 47. Ten were volunteer coaches. Analytic themes related to decision making include: 1) personal experience drives decisions more than concussion training, 2) coaches fear the legal liability of missing a concussive event on the field, and 3) discomfort with the ambiguity of making decisions on the field. Coach perceived factors for improving comfort with decision making were: 1) availability of checklists or tools for use on the sidelines, 2) improve shared decision making with all stakeholders, and 3) access to medical professionals on the sidelines. Conclusions There is a possible misalignment between coaches’ actual practices on the field and best practice guidelines. Coaches report behaviors on the sidelines that are distinct from practice guidelines and public health initiatives related to removal from play and return to play when events on the field present the potential for concussion.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207