MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187415135 · doi:10.1002/pmrj.12686

Cardiovascular sequelae of <scp>sports‐related</scp> concussions

2021· review· en· W3187415135 on OpenAlexaff
Halli Krzyzaniak, Ali Fatehi Hassanabad

Bibliographic record

VenuePM&R · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyClinical trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are becoming more aware of sports-related concussions (SRCs). Current return-to-play (RTP) guidelines are often based on subjective clinical symptoms rather than objective physiologic measures. Although evidence is limited, the purpose of this article is to summarize the data pertaining to acute and chronic cardiovascular effects of SRCs, and to determine whether there are objective metrics that could improve currently used RTP protocols. Research shows that SRCs cause cardiovascular autonomic nervous system (CV-ANS) dysfunction induced by decreased baroreceptor sensitivity (BRS). This disturbance persists past the point of clinical symptom resolution and can worsen through subsequent exertion, which may impact long-term recovery. Further studies are needed to establish the most appropriate physiologic metrics for analyzing recovery post-SRC and whether the addition of physiologic measures to RTP guidelines improves recovery from these injuries. This is an understudied area that carries important clinical implications. Larger and more robust trials are warranted to inform the development of guidelines that should focus on lessening the compounding effects of multiple concussions and improve the management of SRCs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.388
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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePM&RSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207