MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160649108 · doi:10.4085/1947-380x-20-088

Student Athletic Therapists' Knowledge of Opioids and Other Pain-Relieving Medications

2021· article· en· W3160649108 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAthletic Training Education Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsSheridan College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)AthletesPsychologyQualitative researchMedicinePain medicineHealth careMedical educationPsychiatryPhysical therapyAnesthesiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context In their role as health care providers, student athletic therapists (SATs) are responsible for the prevention and management of injuries. To fully understand an injury, SATs require knowledge of contributing factors, including medications and their use and misuse. Opioid misuse by athletes to manage pain has been documented in the literature, highlighting the importance of SATs being able to recognize opioid use and misuse. Opioids are known to alleviate pain, to impair cognition, and to have addictive qualities which prevents appropriate assessment and management of injuries. Objective The objective of this study was to understand SATs' knowledge of pain-relieving medication, particularly opioids. Design Qualitative study. Setting Semistructured interview. Patients or Other Participants SATs at an accredited institution in Canada. Data Synthesis Data were collected through interviews and transcribed. Themes were developed using triangulation that reflected the data Results Four themes were uncovered: (1) SATs had experienced both personal and professional use of opioids, which formulated their current knowledge; (2) SATs lacked appropriate knowledge of pain-relieving medications in general and of the potential consequences of their lack of knowledge; (3) SATs' knowledge stemmed from culture, social media, and news organizations; (4) SATs felt considerable pressure to provide correct information due to their autonomous role with a team. Conclusions SATs lacked enough knowledge to be able to appropriately recognize and advise athletes on pain-relieving medications, particularly opioids. SATs formulated their knowledge and opinions from sources that were not rooted in research and as such may transfer incorrect information to their athletes. SATs stigmatized athletes who were using pain-relieving medication, which may factor into inappropriate decisions regarding an athlete's care. Finally, SATs carried a significant burden to share correct information with their athletes and did not refer to outside sources (eg, physicians) when they were unsure of the information they were sharing with their athletes.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.318 · 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