Predictors of concussion reporting intentions in adolescent hockey players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Young athletes who do not report a concussion injury are at greater risk for a prolonged recovery time and further neurocognitive impairments. Despite the seriousness of the issue and the scale of the problem, not enough is known about the behavioural underpinnings of concussion underreporting in minor athletes. This paper aims to apply the Knowledge, Attitude, and Behaviour (KAB) framework to the issue of injury reporting in adolescents, with the specific purpose of exploring to which degree concussion knowledge, concussion attitudes, and gender affect concussion reporting intentions of both male and female athletes. We recruited 97 young athletes between the ages of 14 and 19 (M = 16.22, SD = 11.06) from the Okanagan Hockey Academy (Canada) and employed a self-administered supervised survey approach to measuring the target variables. A hierarchical multiple regression was conducted, and consistent with the prior literature, females were more likely to report a sport-related concussion than males. It was further found that attitudes around concussions (i.e., taking concussions seriously) were significant predictors of concussion reporting intention. At the same time, there was no significant relationship between concussion knowledge and concussion reporting intention. These results highlight that knowledge about concussion symptoms is insufficient to warrant proper injury reporting. It will therefore be essential to work on changing the attitudes of young athletes regarding the significance of concussions to achieve meaningful behavioural change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".