The ENIGMA sports injury working group:– an international collaboration to further our understanding of sport-related brain injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport-related brain injury is very common, and the potential long-term effects include a wide range of neurological and psychiatric symptoms, and potentially neurodegeneration. Around the globe, researchers are conducting neuroimaging studies on primarily homogenous samples of athletes. However, neuroimaging studies are expensive and time consuming, and thus current findings from studies of sport-related brain injury are often limited by small sample sizes. Further, current studies apply a variety of neuroimaging techniques and analysis tools which limit comparability among studies. The ENIGMA Sports Injury working group aims to provide a platform for data sharing and collaborative data analysis thereby leveraging existing data and expertise. By harmonizing data from a large number of studies from around the globe, we will work towards reproducibility of previously published findings and towards addressing important research questions with regard to diagnosis, prognosis, and efficacy of treatment for sport-related brain injury. Moreover, the ENIGMA Sports Injury working group is committed to providing recommendations for future prospective data acquisition to enhance data quality and scientific rigor.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".