Introducing the Child Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 6 (Child SCAT6)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The requirement for a child-specific tool that can be used by health care professionals (HCPs) in the management of sport-related concussion (SRC) was recognised by the Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) in 2012 with the introduction of the Child Sport Concussion Assessment Tool 3 (Child SCAT3) for use with children ages 5-12 years. 1 This tool paralleled and complemented the SCAT3, which was developed for use in athletes, ages 13 years and over. 1 The CISG revised the Child SCAT3 following the fifth International Consensus Conference on Concussion in Sport (Berlin 2016), with the release of the Child SCAT5. 2 At that time, the version number (5) was chosen to align the version number with the consensus meeting number, and therefore, there is no Child SCAT4.During 6th International Conference on Concussion in Sport held in Amsterdam in 2022, the CISG reviewed the evidence to implement improvements to the Child SCAT5 and develop the Child SCAT6.
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 | 0.017 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
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".