Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent tragedies in bull riding have highlighted the need for prospective epidemiologic investigation of injury patterns.OBJECTIVE: To document the frequency, type, severity, anatomic location, and mechanism of injury to bull riders participating in professional rodeo in Canada.DESIGN: Five-year prospective cohort study examining 4,375 competitor exposures during bull riding events at selected rodeos. Certified athletic therapists gathered data at 63 of 323 professional rodeos in Canada from 1995 through 1999. Data were included when a registered bull rider was injured and the Canadian Pro Rodeo Sport Medicine Team was officially present and providing services. The main outcome measures were the frequency, severity, and anatomic location of injuries to bull riders.RESULTS: According to the injury classification system (severe, minor, or other), 36% of injuries to bull riders were severe. Fractures were the most common severe injury. Concussions constituted 10.6% of all injuries; neck injuries and concussion with other head and facial injuries accounted for 28.9%. About half (48%) of injuries were minor. The knee and shoulder were the most commonly injured joints.CONCLUSION: Injuries to the head, neck, and face may deserve more attention by both researchers and those interested in preventing injury to bull riders. Epidemiologic information will give on-site physicians a better foundation in preparing to care for injured rodeo participants.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".