MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216962245 · doi:10.1136/bjsports-2021-ioc.413

451 Who? What? Where? Why? Describing the patterns of injury in high school male collision sports

2021· article· en· W3216962245 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephen West, Eric Gibson, Mark Patrick Pankow, Amanda M. Black, Carolyn Emery

Bibliographic record

VenuePoster presentations · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFootballIce hockeyConcussionAthletesAmerican footballInjury preventionPoison controlPhysical therapyCollisionMedicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer securityMedical emergencyComputer scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Collision sports (Canadian football, ice hockey, lacrosse, rugby) are popular among Canadian male youth, however it is recognised that collision sports are associated with a high risk of injury. Objective To describe the patterns of collision sport-related injury in Canadian male high school athletes. Design Secondary analysis of a cross-sectional survey. Setting High schools (Alberta, Canada) Participants 360 male students (of 2029 respondents), who play at least one of Football, Hockey, Lacrosse or Rugby. Assessment of Risk Factors An anonymous online survey included questions regarding the mechanism, site, type, and nature of collision sport injuries. Main Outcome Measurements Sport-related injury self-reported in the past year. Results Of the 2029 survey respondents, 958 (47.2%) were male of which 360 (37.6%) reported playing at least one collision sport. Of all serious injuries reported by males, collision sports accounted for 33% [hockey: 63(17%), football: 41(11%), lacrosse: 9(3%), rugby 8(2%)]. The head/face accounted for the largest proportion of injuries (hockey: 25.4%, football: 24.4%, lacrosse: 33.3%, rugby 50.0%). Concussion was the most common injury in rugby (50.0%) and football (24.4%) and fractures the most common in hockey (27.0%) and lacrosse (44.4%). Contact with another player was the most frequently reported mechanism of injury (rugby: 87.5%, football: 77.1%, lacrosse: 66.7%, hockey: 57.4%), with most injuries related to contact by a player who was bigger or the same size as the injured player (hockey/rugby:100%, lacrosse: 83.3%, football: 81.5%). Conclusions Sport-related injuries in male collision sports are common, with four sports accounting for 33% of all reported injuries across male Canadian high school sports. Head/face injuries were the most common, with the majority of injuries occurring due to contact with another player. There is scope to consider primary prevention strategies such as contact training and rule changes to address the risk of injury in youth collision sport.

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)0.001
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 score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoster presentationsSame topicDiverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207