MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3156554847 · doi:10.4085/1062-6050-0003.21

Concurrent Validity of a Stationary Cycling Test and the Buffalo Concussion Treadmill Test in Adults With Concussion

2021· article· en· W3156554847 on OpenAlexaff
Robert F. Graham, Cody R. van Rassel, Joel S. Burma, Trevor D. Rutschmann, Lauren N. Miutz, Bonnie Sutter, Kathryn Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Athletic Training · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsHotchkiss Brain InstituteAlberta Children's HospitalOntario Brain InstituteSpinal Cord Injury AlbertaUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcussionPhysical therapyMedicineInterquartile rangeRating of perceived exertionContext (archaeology)Sports medicineHeart rateExertionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlInjury preventionBlood pressureInternal medicineEmergency medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: After concussion, a multifaceted assessment is recommended, including tests of physical exertion. The current criterion standard for exercise testing after concussion is the Buffalo Concussion Treadmill Test (BCTT); however, validated tests that use alternative exercise modalities are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and concurrent validity of a universal cycling test of exertion compared with the BCTT in adults who sustained a sport-related concussion. DESIGN: Crossover study. SETTING: University sports medicine clinic. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twenty adults (age = 18-60 years) diagnosed with a sport-related concussion. INTERVENTION(S): Participants completed the BCTT and a cycling test of exertion in random order, approximately 48 hours apart. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The primary outcome of interest was maximum heart rate (HRmax; beats per minute [bpm]). Secondary outcomes of interest were the total number of symptoms endorsed on the Post-Concussion Symptom Scale, whether the participant reached volitional fatigue (yes or no), the symptom responsible for test cessation (Post-Concussion Symptom Scale), maximum rating of perceived exertion, symptom severity on a visual scale (0-10), and the time to test cessation. RESULTS: Of the 20 participants, 19 (10 males, 9 females) completed both tests. One participant did not return for the second test and was excluded from the analysis. No adverse events were reported. The median HRmax for the BCTT (171 bpm; interquartile range = 139-184 bpm) was not different from the median HRmax for the cycle (173 bpm; interquartile range = 160-182 bpm; z = -0.63; P = .53). For both tests, the 3 most frequently reported symptoms responsible for test cessation were headache, dizziness, and pressure in the head. Of interest, most participants (64%) reported a different symptom responsible for cessation of each test. CONCLUSIONS: On the novel cycling test of exertion, participants achieved similar HRmax and test durations and, therefore, this test may be a suitable alternative to the BCTT. Future research to understand the physiological reason for the heterogeneity in symptoms responsible for test cessation is warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Athletic TrainingSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207