MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993701512 · doi:10.1002/tsm2.126

Transient injuries are a problem in field hockey: A prospective one‐season cohort study

2019· article· en· W2993701512 on OpenAlexaff
Huw Rees, Ian Shrier, Ulrik McCarthy Persson, Eamonn Delahunt, Colin Boreham, Catherine Blake

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Sports Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInjury preventionPhysical therapyOccupational safety and healthPoison controlProspective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)SurgeryEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Injury definitions encompass all physical complaints, medical attention, and time loss. Expressing injury burden in terms of short- and long-term impact on athlete performance may be meaningful for coaches in terms of preparation. Therefore, our aim was to describe transient (symptoms <7 days) and substantial (symptoms ≥7 days) injuries suffered in field hockey throughout the Irish Hockey League (IHL). Following ethical approval, participants were assigned unique accounts to record injuries through a monitoring software. An all physical complaints definition was adopted. Team physiotherapists were contacted weekly to further capture and corroborate details on injuries. Transient and substantial injury classifications were applied. A total of 173 injuries in 14 690 exposure hours (11.8/1000 h) occurred. Incidence of medical attention (n = 119) and time-loss (n = 70) injuries was 8.1/1000 h and 4.8/1000 h. Teams suffered transient injuries every 2.3 weeks (median = 2, IQR = 4) at a rate of 6.3/1000 h and substantial injuries every 2.5 weeks (median = 1.5, IQR = 3.25) at a rate of 5.5/1000 h. The lower back and knee were common transient injuries (7.5%), with the hamstring a common substantial injury (11.6%). Although many field hockey injuries are substantial, transient injuries are equally as frequent. These additional means of classifying injuries inform teams of the injuries that will cause disruption within their squad.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational Sports MedicineSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207