MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Sleep Disturbance And Injuries In Collegiate Soccer And Basketball Players

2023· article· en· W4387055154 on OpenAlexaff
Oluwatoyosi B. A. Owoeye, Anthony Breitbach, Flavio Esposito, Natania Nguyen, Amy M. Bender, Jami R. Neme

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronotypeSleep disorderPhysical therapyMedicineSleep (system call)BasketballLogistic regressionPsychologyMorningPsychiatryInsomniaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: (1) To assess sleep disturbance, characterized by sleep difficulty, sleep inadequacy, poor sleep quality, and evening sleep chronotype in collegiate soccer and basketball players. (2) To examine the association between sleep metrics and injury risk in players. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study including 127 collegiate soccer and basketball players [48.8% female; mean age (SD) of 20.1 (1.6) years]. Using a mobile app, we administered questionnaires to players during the preseason (2020/2021) to collect demographic, injury history, medical history, and sleep (Athlete Sleep Screening Questionnaire; ASSQ) information. Sleep difficulty was based on specific composite scores of 5-7 (mild) and > =8 (moderate/severe). Inadequate sleep was defined as <7 hours. Injury outcome was knee and/or ankle injury collected postseason using a modified version of a previously validated Oslo Sports Trauma Research Center-Patellar Tendinopathy Questionnaire through self-report. Specific sleep metrics were analyzed using descriptive statistics and sleep-injury relationships were analyzed using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 7.9% (3.8% - 14.0%) of players had a mild sleep difficulty and 4.8% (1.0% - 13.3%) had a moderate/severe (all severe) sleep difficulty. One in three players, that is, 32.5% (95% CI: 24.5% - 41.5%) had sleep inadequacy; 9.1% (95% CI: 4.4% - 16.1%) had poor sleep quality and 9.5% (95% CI: 5.0% - 15.9%) had “eveningness” sleep chronotype. The prevalence of sleep disturbance was higher in females by a range of 0.5% - 4.6% compared with males across all sleep metrics except for sleep inadequacy. Players with inadequate sleep quantity had significantly higher odds for injury (OR: 5.93, 95% CI: 9.72 - 20.47, p = 0.005). No association (OR: 1.57, 95% CI: 0.28 - 8.77, p = 0.607) was found between sleep quality and injury. CONCLUSIONS: Sleep problems are prevalent among collegiate soccer and basketball players with 1 in 3 players having sleep inadequacy and 1 in 20 players having a moderate/severe sleep difficulty. Sleep quantity and not quality predicted injury risk. These findings suggest a substantial sleep problem in collegiate soccer and basketball players and warrants that players are regularly screened, and timely interventions applied. Supported by Saint Louis University

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 topicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention→French-language works237,207→