Prevention strategies and modifiable risk factors for sport-related concussions and head impacts: a systematic review and meta-analysis
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
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate prevention strategies, their unintended consequences and modifiable risk factors for sport-related concussion (SRC) and/or head impact risk. DESIGN: This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42019152982) and conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCES: Eight databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Cochrane (Systematic Review and Controlled Trails Registry), SPORTDiscus, EMBASE, ERIC0 were searched in October 2019 and updated in March 2022, and references searched from any identified systematic review. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Study inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) original data human research studies, (2) investigated SRC or head impacts, (3) evaluated an SRC prevention intervention, unintended consequence or modifiable risk factor, (4) participants competing in any sport, (5) analytic study design, (6) systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included to identify original data manuscripts in reference search and (7) peer-reviewed. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) review articles, pre-experimental, ecological, case series or case studies and (2) not written in English. RESULTS: In total, 220 studies were eligible for inclusion and 192 studies were included in the results based on methodological criteria as assessed through the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network high ('++') or acceptable ('+') quality. Evidence was available examining protective gear (eg, helmets, headgear, mouthguards) (n=39), policy and rule changes (n=38), training strategies (n=34), SRC management strategies (n=12), unintended consequences (n=5) and modifiable risk factors (n=64). Meta-analyses demonstrated a protective effect of mouthguards in collision sports (incidence rate ratio, IRR 0.74; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.89). Policy disallowing bodychecking in child and adolescent ice hockey was associated with a 58% lower concussion rate compared with bodychecking leagues (IRR 0.42; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.53), and evidence supports no unintended injury consequences of policy disallowing bodychecking. In American football, strategies limiting contact in practices were associated with a 64% lower practice-related concussion rate (IRR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.80). Some evidence also supports up to 60% lower concussion rates with implementation of a neuromuscular training warm-up programme in rugby. More research examining potentially modifiable risk factors (eg, neck strength, optimal tackle technique) are needed to inform concussion prevention strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Policy and rule modifications, personal protective equipment, and neuromuscular training strategies may help to prevent SRC. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019152982.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it