Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some ex-professional ice hockey enforcers (players whose primary role was fighting) have experienced negative health outcomes following their careers including substance use. Some have suggested that negative post-career outcomes following a career in contact sport relate specifically to neurotrauma. The purpose of this study was to determine whether ex-professional ice hockey enforcers were negatively impacted by substance use during and/or following their careers. It was hypothesised that given their role in the sport, significant exposure to injury (including concussions) occurred, leading to challenges post-career including substance use. This study utilises a mixed methods quantitative and qualitative approach with one-on-one semi-structured interviews and questions related to substance use. This hypothesis for this study was not supported. Participants in this study reported low levels of substance use post-career. Patterns of substance use during career varied by era with a change in use from alcohol and over-the-counter stimulants to opioids, sleep aids, and anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS) estimated to occur near the mid to late 1990s. Four participants described patterns of excessive alcohol use during their careers. Stimulant use was prevalent in ice hockey pre-mid-1990s. The use of prescription opioids and sleep aids was reportedly rare before the mid to late 1990s, but eventually became easily attainable via team medical staff and prescription sharing. Two participants from the later era also reported use of AAS. This sample of ex-professional hockey enforcers experienced a significant number of concussions, continue to have challenges with chronic pain, and were exposed to several unique stressors during their careers, the effects of which may have varied based upon how the role was viewed. A combination of these factors may have resulted in substance use in some of these athletes during, but not following their careers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".