2.17 The influence of prior night’s sleep duration on baseline neurocognitive testing in Canadian Football League athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Short sleep duration has been shown to affect baseline neurocognitive screening scores in high school and college athletes, but no studies have shown a similar effect in professional athletes. We hypothesized that Canadian Football League (CFL) athletes with a shorter sleep duration the night prior to baseline Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing (ImPACT) would have lower neurocognitive scores and higher post concussion symptom scores (PCSS). Design Retrospective cross-sectional. Setting Canada-wide outpatient. Participants 1438 male CFL athletes ages 22–40 were included. Exclusion criteria included no self-reported sleep duration, failure to meet ImPACT internal validity measures, history of learning disabilities, ADD, ADHD, or psychiatric illness. Interventions (or Assessment of Risk Factors) Participants were assigned to three groups based on sleep duration, short (<7 hours), intermediate (≥ 7 to ≤ 9) or long (>9). Outcome Measures We compared the overall ImPACT neurocognitive scores, sub-category scores, and PCSS between groups. Main Results Pairwise comparison showed lower visual memory scores for the short sleep duration group compared to intermediate (p<0.001) and long (p=0.009). Comparison of PCSS showed higher symptom scores for the short sleep duration group when compared to intermediate (p<0.001) and long (p=0.009). Conclusions CFL athletes with short sleep duration performed worse on 1 of 4 ImPACT domains and reported more concussion symptoms. Clinicians must be cautious in using return to baseline symptom and neurocognitive screening scores as the sole determinant in return to play decisions, especially in athletes who slept <7 hours prior to baseline testing.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".