438 Does a peer to peer learning technology integrated workshop facilitate neuromuscular training injury prevention program coach learning?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background</h3> Workshops are used to educate coaches on Neuromuscular Training (NMT) warm-ups to reduce the risk of youth sport injury. Currently, there is no research assessing different learning strategies and its influence on coaches’ self-efficacy and knowledge after attending a workshop. <h3>Objective</h3> To evaluate whether a peer-to-peer (P2P) learning technology integrated workshop, improved coaches’ self-efficacy and ability to identify NMT exercise errors compared to a standard workshop. <h3>Design</h3> Randomized controlled trial. <h3>Setting</h3> Youth soccer clubs in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. <h3>Participants</h3> Eighty-five recreational youth soccer coaches. <h3>Intervention</h3> Coaches within each club randomly attended one of two workshops offered to learn a NMT warm-up: the intervention workshop (technology-integrated instruction), or control workshop (standard instruction). <h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3> At the end of the workshop, the soccer NMT warm-up exercise test, a video-based test where coaches identify common NMT exercise errors, was completed. At the beginning and end of the workshop, the soccer NMT warm-up self-efficacy scale was completed to assess coaches’ self-efficacy change in their ability to identify NMT exercises errors on a 7-point Likert scale. <h3>Results</h3> Mean NMT warm-up exercise test scores were 72% (SD: 13%) for the control and 71% (SD: 13%) for the intervention workshop. Mean change in NMT warm-up self-efficacy scores were 0.98 (SD: 1.33) for the control and 1.77 (SD: 1.19) for the intervention workshop. Multivariable linear regression analyses indicated that workshop delivery method was not associated with the exercise test score (b= - 3.45, 95% CI: -10.80 to 3.91, R<sup>2</sup>=0.13) but was associated with a greater difference in change of self-efficacy scores for the intervention workshop (b= 0.97, 95% CI: 0.26 to 1.89, R<sup>2</sup>=0.13). <h3>Conclusions</h3> A P2P learning technology integrated instructional workshop did not differentially impact coaches’ ability to identify exercise errors, but it did increase coaches’ self-efficacy in identifying exercise errors compared to a standard workshop.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it