MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3195571239 · doi:10.11575/prism/38981

Equipment and Concussion in Youth Ice Hockey and Ringette

2021· dissertation· en· W3195571239 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ashley Kolstad

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInternational Olympic CommitteeUniversity of TorontoYork UniversityMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Children's Hospital Research InstituteUniversity of OttawaUniversity of AlbertaUniversité Laval
KeywordsIce hockeyConcussionPsychologyAeronauticsApplied psychologyPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringMedicineMedical emergencyInjury preventionPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis examined equipment related to concussion prevention in youth ice hockey and ringette players. The first study examined potential equipment-related risk factors for concussion in youth ice hockey players. We considered both a prospective cohort (rate of concussion) and nested case (concussion) control (musculoskeletal injury) design (odds of concussion) for each equipment characteristic. Main results showed significant lower rates and odds of concussion for mouthguard wearers (when compared to non-wearers) and no differences in concussion likelihood for newer and older helmet ages. The second study examined the feasibility and reliability for conducting virtual helmet fit assessments in youth ice hockey and ringette players for future concussion prevention examination. The results indicated high percent agreement (≥80%) for reliability on almost all criteria for virtual assessments and barriers for assessments related to technology (e.g., camera quality) and environment (e.g., lighting). Overall, equipment may be important for concussion prevention and player safety.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→