11.17 It’s not just a different stick: head contact and suspected-concussion rates higher in female youth ringette compared tohockey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To compare physical contact (PC), direct head contact (HC), and suspected-injury (including concussion) incidence rates (IR) between female youth ringette and hockey. Design Cross-sectional. Setting Female youth ringette and hockey in Alberta, Canada. Participants Sixteen female U16AA (ages 14–15) ringette and U15AA (ages 13–14) hockey games from the 2021–22 season. Assessment of Risk Factors Female youth ringette vs. hockey. Outcome Measures PC, direct HC, and suspected-injury (including concussion) IRs and incidence rate ratios (IRRs, 95% confidence intervals) comparing sports. Proportion of bodychecking (PCLevels4–5) and HC penalized. Main Results Ringette had a 2.6-fold higher rate of bodychecking (IRR=2.63,95% CI: 1.59–4.37) compared to hockey (IRRingette=21.3/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 13.6–33.4; IRHockey=8.09/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 6.31–10.36). Ringette also had a 2-fold higher rate of direct HC (IRR=2.08,95% CI: 1.37–3.16) compared to hockey (IRRingette=18.74/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 13.07–26.89; IRHockey=9.02/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 7.19–11.32). A 3.4-fold higher rate of suspected-injury (IRR=3.37,95% CI: 1.40–8.15) was found in ringette (IRRingette=2.10/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 1.14–3.88; IRHockey=0.62/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 0.32–1.20). The point-estimate for suspected-concussion rate was 2-fold higher (IRR=1.93,95% CI: 0.43–8.74) in ringette compared to hockey (IRRingette=0.60/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 0.20–1.84; IRHockey=0.31/100-team-minutes, 95% CI: 0.11–0.89), although not significant. Despite being prohibited in both sports, the proportion of bodychecks (PC4–5Ringette=18%; PC4–5Hockey=17%) and direct HC penalized (HCRingette=6%; HCHockey=6%) were low. Conclusions This study demonstrates a need for future research regarding effective injury prevention strategies (e.g., equipment, policy, training programs) in youth female ringette and hockey due to the high rates of bodychecking, HC, and suspected-concussion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".