078 Injury risk in school children with probable developmental coordination disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Sport and recreation-related (S&R) injury burden is high in adolescents (ages 13–19; incidence proportions (IP) ranging 29.4–40.2 injuries/100 students/year). There is a paucity of S&R injury data in children (<13 years). Individuals with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) and/or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) may have a higher risk of injury; however, the focus has not been S&R injury or children in these studies. Objective To examine S&R injury risk in school children, comparing typically developing children to those screening positive for probable (p) DCD and/or ADHD. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Elementary schools in Calgary, Canada. Patients (or Participants) In total, 681 students (grades 4–6; ages 8–13) from 33 randomly selected schools were recruited. Interventions (or Assessment of Risk Factors) Children were screened for pDCD and/or pADHD through the DCD Questionnaire (DCDQ’07) and the Vanderbilt ADHD Rating Scale (VADPRS), respectively. Main Outcome Measurements S&R participation and one-year injury history (medical attention and time loss) were child/parent/guardian reported on a survey. Results The overall S&R IP was 28.2 injuries/100 participations (95%CI: 24.8–31.6). The injury rate (IR) was 2.43 injuries/1000-participation hours (95%CI: 2.06–2.85), with no significant differences between typically developing children and those screening positive for pDCD and/or pADHD. The IR for typically developing children was 2.2 injuries/1000-hours (95%CI: 1.79–2.68), 3.13 (95%CI: 2.21–4.42) for pDCD, 2.82 (95%CI: 1.29–5.34) for pADHD, and 2.93 (95%CI: 1.52–5.12) for children with pDCD and ADHD. Compared to typically developing children, children with pDCD [adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.08; 95%CI: 0.64–1.84], pADHD (OR = 1.14; 95%CI: 0.53–2.45), and pDCD/ADHD (OR = 1.24; 95%CI: 0.58–2.65) were at no greater risk for S&R injuries. Conclusions Similar to adolescents, burden of S&R injury is high in children. Children with pDCD and/or pADHD were not at a greater risk of S&R injury than typically developing children. Injury prevention strategies should target children and adolescents.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".