Blowing the Whistle on Concussion Knowledge and Education in Youth Sport Referees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To gain an understanding of referee concussion knowledge, what sporting organizations were doing to prepare their referees to recognize concussions in youth sport, and what role referees could play in overall concussion safety. Materials and Methods: A total of 134 referees participated in the study across four provincial sporting organizations (rugby, soccer, ice hockey, and football). Participants completed a concussion knowledge questionnaire that explored knowledge about concussion education, recognition, management, preparedness, and the role of the referee in overall concussion management. Results: Overall, the sample was found to be moderately knowledgeable about concussions. Referees that received previous formal concussion education had statistically significant higher average scores when compared to those without formalized concussion education ( P =0.001). However, only 24% of respondents reported receiving any formal education from their sporting body or referee organization. About 85% felt that referees could play an important role in concussion recognition in youth sport, but only 41% felt they were adequately equipped with the knowledge and skills to recognize these injuries. Conclusion: The findings from this study suggest that national, provincial, and individual sporting organizations should ensure that all stakeholders (including referees) are formally educated about concussions to encourage a safety-first environment for youth athletes. Educational sessions should focus on the general aspects of SRC while also focusing on the specific role of the referee in concussion recognition. Keywords: sports-related concussions, officials, injury prevention, injury recognition
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 | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".