MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993125079 · doi:10.2217/cnc-2019-0007

Remote concussion history does not affect visually-guided reaching in young adult females

2019· article· en· W2993125079 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Fueger, Lauren E. Sergio, Sabine Heuer, Labina Petrovska, Wendy E. Huddleston

Bibliographic record

VenueConcussion · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionAffect (linguistics)Task (project management)Cued speechCognitionPsychologyYoung adultPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAudiologyPoison controlDevelopmental psychologyMedicineInjury preventionCognitive psychologyNeuroscienceCommunicationMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: We examined the long-term effects of concussions in young adult females on visuomotor behavior during a visually-guided reaching task of various complexities. MATERIALS & METHODS: 20 females with a history of longer than 6 months since a concussion and 20 healthy females quickly and accurately performed a delayed reach to a previously cued target. RESULTS: As both cognitive and motor load increased, task performance decreased for both groups (p < 0.05). However, contrary to our primary hypothesis, no differences in task performance were found between the two experimental groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The young adult females with a remote history of concussion demonstrated no deficits in visuomotor behavior on an attention-mediated reaching task as compared with control participants.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcussionSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207