Health-Related Outcomes 3-15 Years Following Ankle Sprain Injury in Youth Sport: What Does the Future Hold?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study examined the association between youth sport-related ankle sprain injury and health-related outcomes, 3-15 years postinjury. METHODS: A historical cohort study in which uninjured controls were cluster-matched with injured cases. The primary outcome was self-reported Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS). Secondary outcomes included measures of adiposity, validated questionnaires for physical activity, athletic identity, fear of pain, and tests of strength, balance, and function. RESULTS: We recruited 86 participants (median age of 23 years; 77% female); 50 with a time-loss ankle sprain, median of 8 years postinjury, and 36 uninjured controls cluster-matched by sex and sport. Based on mixed effects multivariable regression models, previously injured participants demonstrated poorer outcomes than controls on all 5 FAOS subscales regardless of sex and time since injury, with the largest differences observed in symptoms (-20.9, 99% CI: -29.5 to -12.3) and ankle-related quality of life (-25.3, 99% CI: -34.7 to -15.9) subscales. Injured participants also had poorer unipedal dynamic balance (-1.9, 99% CI: 3.5 to -0.2) and greater fear of pain (7.2, 99% CI: 0.9-13.4) compared with controls. No statistically significant differences were found for other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: At 3-15 years following time-loss ankle sprain injury in youth sport, previously injured participants had more pain and symptoms, poorer self-reported function, ankle-related quality of life, reduced sport participation, balance, and greater fear of pain than controls. This underlines the need to promote the primary prevention of ankle sprains and secondary prevention of potential health consequences, including posttraumatic osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, historical cohort study.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".