School performance in youth after a concussion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to identify school problems and levels of cognitive activity in youths aged 5–18 years with a concussion during the recovery stages of return to school (RTS). Study Design In a prospective cohort, participants completed in-person assessments at three time points: First Visit Post-injury, Symptom Resolution Visit, and Follow-Up Visit. These time points varied based on the participants’ recovery progress. The post-concussion symptom scale (PCSS) and a cognitive activity scale were completed every 2 days until symptom resolution was achieved. Participants and their parents completed a school questionnaire detailing how their concussion had impacted their school learning/performance and their level of concern about their injury as well as the Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT). Results Sixty-three percent (N = 44/70) of participants returned to school by the First Visit Post-injury (average 7.7 days following injury), and of these, 50% (N = 22) were experiencing school problems. Sixty-five participants (out of 70) returned to school at the Follow-Up Visit, and of these, 18% reported school problems. There was a significant difference in the school problems reported by parents and youth. At the First Visit Post-injury, the youth reported more problems (p = 0.02), and the In-Person Symptom Resolution Visit with parents reported more problems (p = 0.01). The cognitive activity score increased, while the PCSS score decreased from RTS Stage 1 to Stage 5. Conclusions This study identified that 50% of youth experienced school problems at the First Visit Post-injury, whereas only 18% reported school problems at the Follow-Up Visit. There is a significant difference in the perception of school problems reported by youth and their parents at different stages of recovery. The amount and complexity of cognitive activity increased with decreasing symptoms and increasing RTS stage. Findings can guide youth with a concussion and their parents in supporting a cautious return to school with accommodations. Healthcare providers and researchers can use this knowledge to better support youth in their return to school and understand the importance of gathering information from youth and their parents to gain the best insight into recovery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".