Barriers to and facilitators of return to learning following a sport-related concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify barriers to and facilitators of return to learning (RTL) for female secondary school students following a sport-related concussion (SRC), and to identify critical junctures on the injury-to-recovery continuum that can be targeted to enhance the RTL process. DESIGN: A grounded theory approach using in-depth qualitative interviews. SETTING: Secondary schools within the York Region District School Board in Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Ten female secondary school students who presented to a sports medicine physician with an SRC in 2015 or 2016. Five of the students received a Green Folder intervention containing an RTL strategy, while 5 students received no RTL intervention following their SRC. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted in person or by telephone. All interviews were audiorecorded and transcribed. The transcriptions were analyzed, coded, and examined for common themes by 2 independent reviewers. MAIN FINDINGS: Barriers to RTL included a lack of a graduated RTL process, students' own internal stress, poor communication of expectations, lack of concussion education, and inadequate support from teachers. Facilitators of RTL included academic accommodations and having a primary contact person within the school system. Owing to inconsistent implementation, the impact of the Green Folder intervention as a facilitator of RTL remains unknown. CONCLUSION: Results of this study support existing findings in the realm of concussion research. A novel finding includes the importance of a primary contact person as a facilitator of RTL. This person could help to overcome some of the identified barriers to RTL and improve outcomes by assisting with academic accommodations, providing reassurance regarding these accommodations, improving education among teachers and students, and enhancing communication between stakeholders.
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 | 0.006 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".