Sex and Sport Differences in College Lacrosse and Soccer Head Impact Biomechanics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sport-related head impact biomechanics research has been male-centric and focused primarily on American football and ice hockey, which do not address popular sports in which both sexes participate. The purpose of this study was to quantify college female and male lacrosse and soccer head impact biomechanics. METHODS: Head impact biomechanics were collected from college lacrosse and soccer players across two Division 1 college athletic programs (96 female athletes, 141 male athletes; age, 19.8 ± 1.3 yr; height, 174.8 ± 9.2 cm; mass, 72.4 ± 11.7 kg). We deployed helmetless head impact measurement devices (X2 Biosystems xPatch) before each event. Peak linear and rotational accelerations were log-transformed for random intercepts general linear mixed models, and subsequently categorized based on impact magnitude for additional categorical analyses. RESULTS: Most linear (69.4%) and rotational (72.3%) head impact accelerations sustained by our study cohort were categorized as mild. On average, male athletes sustained impacts with higher linear accelerations than females (P = 0.04), and lacrosse athletes sustained higher linear acceleration impacts than soccer athletes (P = 0.023). Soccer athletes sustained significantly higher-magnitude impacts during competitions versus practices (linear, P < 0.001, rotational, P < 0.001), whereas lacrosse athletes sustained higher-magnitude impacts during practices versus competition (linear, P < 0.001; rotational, P < 0.001). Male athletes sustained higher accelerations in competitions versus practice (linear, P = 0.004; rotational, P < 0.001), whereas female athletes sustained higher accelerations in practice versus competitions (linear, P < 0.001; rotational, P = 0.02). There were no interactions between sex and sport on impact magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: Male athletes and lacrosse athletes experience higher-magnitude head impacts. Given the limited literature in this area, future research should continue characterizing head impact biomechanics in women's and nonhelmeted sports as well as validate nonhelmeted head impact technologies.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".