MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3005557567 · doi:10.1186/s12889-020-8244-5

The youth concussion awareness network (You-CAN) - a school-based peer-led intervention to improve concussion reporting and social support: the protocol for a cluster randomized trial

2020· article· en· W3005557567 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrea Hickling, Kylie D. Mallory, Katherine E. Wilson, Rosephine Del Fernandes, Pamela Fuselli, Nick Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsParachuteToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDepartment of Surgery, University of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoBloorview Research InstituteUniversity of OttawaChildren’s Hospital of Wisconsin Research InstituteSeattle Children's Research InstituteUniversity of Washington
KeywordsConcussionBiostatisticsMedicineProtocol (science)Intervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialPublic healthCluster randomised controlled trialPoison controlInjury preventionSuicide preventionPhysical therapyMedical emergencyPsychiatryAlternative medicineNursingSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Concussion prevalence is increasing in the pediatric population, and is a matter of public health concern. Concussion symptoms can be physical, cognitive, emotional and behavioural, and last longer in high school aged youth than adults. Concussions are underreported in youth due to their lack of knowledge, social environment, perceived outcomes of reporting, norms, and self-efficacy. The Youth Concussion Awareness Network (You-CAN) is a school-based peer-led program designed to increase high school students’ intent to report a concussion, and provide social support to a peer. This study aims to investigate whether participation in You-CAN, a program grounded in service learning principles, impacts concussion knowledge, attitudes, intent to report a suspected concussion to an adult, and intent to provide social support to a peer. Secondary aims include assessing the implementation fidelity and acceptability of the intervention. Methods This longitudinal study will use a cluster randomized trial design. Three high schools from six randomly selected Canadian school boards will participate and be randomized to three study arms: (1) You-CAN led by school staff; (2) You-CAN led by school staff and research team; and (3) untreated comparison group. Intervention arms 1 and 2 will deliver the You-CAN program and create a Concussion Council at their school. The Concussion Council will deliver a concussion awareness campaign and participate in an online showcase with other participating schools. In addition, arm 2 will have monthly video-calls with the research team. A survey based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour will be administered school-wide with all arms (1, 2, 3) at two time points (beginning {T0} and end {T1} of the school year). Exit interviews will be completed with the Concussion Councils and participating school staff. Discussion This study will provide evidence of the effectiveness of a school-based peer-led concussion program on increasing concussion knowledge, attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, intent to report a concussion to an adult, and intent to provide social support to a peer amongst Canadian high school students. It will also provide important information about the implementation and acceptability of the You-CAN program for high school students and staff. Trial registration This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry ( ISRCTN64944275 , 14/01/2020, retrospectively registered).

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)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.007
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.010

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public Health→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→