Blood–Brain Barrier Dysfunction and Exposure to Head Impacts in University Football Players
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the link between dysfunction of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) and exposure to head impacts in concussed football athletes. DESIGN: This was a prospective, observational pilot study. SETTING: Canadian university football. PARTICIPANTS: The study population consisted of 60 university football players, aged 18 to 25. Athletes who sustained a clinically diagnosed concussion over the course of a single football season were invited to undergo an assessment of BBB leakage. INDEPENDENT VARIABLES: Head impacts detected using impact-sensing helmets were the measured variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical diagnosis of concussion and BBB leakage assessed using dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) within 1 week of concussion were the outcome measures. RESULTS: Eight athletes were diagnosed with a concussion throughout the season. These athletes sustained a significantly higher number of head impacts than nonconcussed athletes. Athletes playing in the defensive back position were significantly more likely to sustain a concussion than remain concussion free. Five of the concussed athletes underwent an assessment of BBB leakage. Logistic regression analysis indicated that region-specific BBB leakage in these 5 athletes was best predicted by impacts sustained in all games and practices leading up to the concussion-as opposed to the last preconcussion impact or the impacts sustained during the game when concussion occurred. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary findings raise the potential for the hypothesis that repeated exposure to head impacts may contribute to the development of BBB pathology. Further research is needed to validate this hypothesis and to test whether BBB pathology plays a role in the sequela of repeated head trauma.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".