MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Effect Of Treadmill Exercise On A Visual Attention Dual-task In Athletes With And Without Recent Concussion.

2023· article· en· W4387052916 on OpenAlexaff
Katelyn Mitchell, Kristine Dalton, Michael E. Cinelli

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBalance (ability)TreadmillAthletesCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)NeurocognitiveHeart rateConcussionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyExertionPsychologyBlood pressurePoison controlCognitionInjury preventionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sport-related concussions (SRC) affect neurocognitive functioning (e.g., visual attention, dual-tasking), that may contribute to an elevated injury risk after return to play (Herman et al., 2015). Since athletes perform at higher levels of exertion in sport, it is important to understand how exertion affects visual attention and dual tasking in athletes after SRC. PURPOSE: To investigate how treadmill exercise affects dynamic visual acuity (DVA) and balance in athletes with and without recent SRC while standing. METHODS: Athletes with recent SRC who had returned to play (CONC = 10; age = 21.6, SD = 2.1) were compared to athlete controls (CONTROL = 20; age = 19.9, SD = 1.5). Participants completed a treadmill exercise protocol, which included 2-minute intervals that increased incline by 2% until reaching 85% maximum heart rate. A DVA program presented a Tumbling ‘E’ target in four orientations while in random continuous motion at 30°/s (Yee et al., 2021). When participants selected the orientation of the ‘E’ using a keypad, the target switched orientations and reduced in size with correct responses. The lowest threshold was scored as the log of the minimum angle of resolution (logMAR). The DVA task was viewed standing on a force plate (1000 Hz) at four time points: 1) pre-exercise, 2) immediately, 3) 10-minutes, and 4) 20-minutes post-exercise. DVA performance was calculated as the difference in DVA score from pre- to post-exercise. Balance was analyzed as the root mean square of centre of pressure displacement (dCOP) in anterior-posterior (A-P) and medial-lateral (M-L) directions. RESULTS: Findings revealed no main effects of group or time for DVA performance. However, main effects of time indicated increased A-P (F = 2.93, p < .05) and M-L dCOP (F = 3.05, p < .05) immediately post-exercise in both groups. Increased A-P dCOP for CONTROL persisted 20-minutes post-exercise (p < .05), while greater variability was observed for CONC (95% CI Time 1: CONTROL = 0.27-0.46 cm, CONC = 0.34-0.61 cm; Time 4: CONTROL = 0.49-0.69 cm, CONC = 0.37-0.63 cm). CONCLUSIONS: Visual attention performance was maintained after exertion for athletes despite history of SRC. However, greater variability in balance control after exercise reflects heterogeneity in dual-task performance and may affect some athletes after returning to sport from SRC.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→