An objective neurophysiological study of subconcussion in female and male high school student athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Emerging evidence from neurophysiological brain vital sign studies show repeatable sensitivity to cumulative subconcussive impairments over a season of contact sports. The current study addressed the need for a large prospective study comparing a low-contact control group to high-contact group. Importantly, the study also expanded the scope of neurophysiological changes related to repetitive head impacts to include female athletes in addition to male athletes. In total, 89 high school student athletes underwent 231 brain vital sign scans over a full calendar year. The results replicated prior subconcussive cognitive impairments (N400 delays) and sensory impairments (N100 amplitude reductions) in male athletes and demonstrated similar subconcussive impairments for the first time in female athletes. While there was no significant subconcussive difference between female and male athletes, female athletes show overall larger responses in general. The findings demonstrated that subconcussive impairments are detectable in a controlled experimental comparison for both female and male high school athletes. The study highlights the opportunity to monitor subconcussive changes in cognitive processing for both female and male athletes to help advance prevention, mitigation and management efforts aimed at reducing athletes’ risk of potential long-term negative health outcomes related to cumulative exposure to repetitive head impacts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".