MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390282160 · doi:10.2196/45688

COVID-19 National Football League (NFL) Injury Analysis: Follow-Up Study

2023· article· en· W4390282160 on OpenAlex
Troy B Puga, Joshua Schafer, Grace Thiel, Nicholas Scigliano, Tiffany Ruan, Andres Toledo, Prince N Agbedanu, Kevin Treffer

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIRx Med · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCollege of Public Health, University of Nebraska Medical CenterUniversity of Nebraska Medical Center
KeywordsLeagueFootballAthletesPandemicEpidemiologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Injury preventionMedicinePoison controlOccupational safety and healthSuicide preventionDemographyPhysical therapyEnvironmental healthGeographyInternal medicineSociologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In 2020, COVID-19 spread across the world and brought normal daily life to a halt, causing the shutdown of nearly everything in order to prevent its spread. The National Football League (NFL) similarly experienced shutdowns and the resulting effects, leaving athletes unable to train in some of the most advanced facilities with many of the best trainers in the world. A previous study, titled COVID-19 Return to Sport: NFL Injury Prevalence Analysis, determined that there was increased injury prevalence during the 2020 season, likely due to decreased physiological adaptations within athletes' bodies as a result of facility shutdowns. Understanding injury epidemiology is vital to the prevention of injuries and the development of return-to-play protocols. Objective: The objective of this study is to perform a follow-up study to COVID-19 Return to Sport: NFL Injury Prevalence Analysis in order to examine the longitudinal effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on injury epidemiology. This study examines if there was a recovery to baseline levels of injuries or if there are still lingering effects from the COVID-19 pandemic-induced spike in injuries. Methods: To determine if there was change in the number of injuries for each season, injury tallies collected from the 17-week-long 2018, 2019, and 2020 NFL regular seasons were compared with those from the 18-week-long 2021 and 2022 NFL regular seasons. A Kruskall-Wallis test with post hoc Dunn analysis was conducted to compare the rate of injuries per team per week between each of the 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 regular seasons. Results: The Kruskall-Wallis test revealed an H statistic of 32.61 (P<.001) for the comparison of the injury rates across the 5 seasons. The post hoc Dunn analysis showed that 2020 had a statistically significant difference when compared with each of the 2018 (P<.001), 2019 (P=.04), 2021 (P=.02), and 2022 (P=.048) seasons. The 2019 season showed no statistical significance when compared with the 2021 (P=.23) and 2022 (P=.13) seasons. Conclusions: The results of this follow-up study, combined with the previous study, show that extended training interruptions stemming from COVID-19 in 2020 induced detraining and led to increased injuries. Additionally, the results of this study show that retraining can occur, resulting in the development of injury protective factors, as injury rates returned to baseline levels after 2020. This is the first large-scale and long-term opportunity to demonstrate the effects of these principles and how they are important to understanding injury epidemiology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.282
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.349 · 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