Does cardiovascular preparticipation screening cause psychological distress in athletes? A systematic review
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
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the psychological implications of cardiovascular preparticipation screening (PPS) in athletes. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, APA PsycInfo, Cochrane Library and grey literature sources. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Observational and experimental studies assessing a population of athletes who participated in a cardiovascular PPS protocol, where psychological outcomes before, during and/or after PPS were reported. METHODS: Results of included studies were synthesised by consolidating similar study-reported measures for key psychological outcomes before, during and/or after screening. Summary measures (medians, ranges) were computed across studies for each psychological outcome. RESULTS: A total of eight studies were included in this review (median sample size: 479). Study cohorts consisted of high school, collegiate, professional and recreational athletes (medians: 59% male, 20.5 years). Most athletes reported positive reactions to screening and would recommend it to others (range 88%-100%, five studies). Increased psychological distress was mainly reported among athletes detected with pathological cardiac conditions and true-positive screening results. In comparison, athletes with false-positive screening results still reported an increased feeling of safety while participating in sport and were satisfied with PPS. A universal conclusion across all studies was that most athletes did not experience psychological distress before, during or after PPS, regardless of the screening modality used or accuracy of results. CONCLUSION: Psychological distress associated with PPS in athletes is rare and limited to athletes with true-positive findings. To mitigate downstream consequences in athletes who experience psychological distress, appropriate interventions and resources should be accessible prior to the screening procedure. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021272887.
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 | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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