Fact or Fiction—Accelerometry Versus Self-Report in Adherence to Pediatric Concussion Protocols: Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Concussion, or mild traumatic brain injury, is a growing public health concern, affecting approximately 1.2% of the population annually. Among children aged 1-17 years, concussion had the highest weighted prevalence compared to other injury types, highlighting the importance of addressing this issue among the youth population. Objective: This study aimed to assess adherence to Return to Activity (RTA) protocols among youth with concussion and to determine if better adherence affected time to recovery and the rate of reinjury. Methods: Children and youth (N=139) aged 5-18 years with concussion were recruited. Self-reported symptoms and protocol stage of recovery were monitored every 48 hours until symptom resolution was achieved. Daily accelerometry was assessed with the ActiGraph. Data were collected to evaluate adherence to the RTA protocol based on physical activity cutoff points corresponding to RTA stages. Participants were evaluated using a battery of physical, cognitive, and behavioral measures at recruitment, upon symptom resolution, and 3 months post symptom resolution. Results: For RTA stage 1, a total of 13% of participants were adherent based on accelerometry, whereas 11% and 34% of participants were adherent for stage 2 and 3, respectively. The median time to symptom resolution was 13 days for participants who were subjectively reported adherent to the RTA protocol and 20 days for those who were subjectively reported as nonadherent (P=.03). No significant agreement was found between self-report of adherence and objective actigraphy adherence to the RTA protocol as well as to other clinical outcomes, such as depression, quality of life, and balance. The rate of reinjury among the entire cohort was 2% (n=3). Conclusions: Overall, adherence to staged protocols post concussion was minimal when assessed with accelerometers, but adherence was higher by self-report. More physical activity restrictions, as specified in the RTA protocol, resulted in lower adherence. Although objective adherence was low, reinjury rate was lower than expected, suggesting a protective effect of being monitored and increased youth awareness of protocols. The results of this study support the move to less restrictive protocols and earlier resumption of daily activities that have since been implemented in more recent protocols.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".