MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226280991 · doi:10.2217/cnc-2021-0008

Parent knowledge of and attitudes towards youth sport-related concussion and associations with child and parent factors

2021· article· en· W4226280991 on OpenAlexafffund
Samantha D. Roberts, Philip Schatz, Johna K. Register‐Mihalik, Magdalena Wójtowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueConcussion · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConcussionBiopsychosocial modelPsychologyInjury preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsMedicineAssociation (psychology)Occupational safety and healthClinical psychologySuicide preventionPoison controlPsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: This cross-sectional study aimed to better understand parental knowledge and attitudes regarding pediatric sport-related concussions, and association with parent/child biopsychosocial factors. Methods: A community sample of ninety families (n = 140 children) were included. Parental concussion knowledge and attitudes, concussion history, sport participation and social risk status score (SRS) were collected. Results: Parents scored an average of 76% accuracy on factual concussion knowledge, with 74% confidence in responses. Parents endorsed a favorable attitude toward concussion reporting and management. Low SRS had higher perceived accuracy of knowledge than medium or high SRS (p = 0.003). SRS influenced over-and-underestimations of factual knowledge (p = .04). Age at first sport and sport contact level influenced factual and perceived concussion knowledge. Conclusion: These findings identify common gaps in concussion knowledge in parents.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcussionSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207