MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401216566 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0306560

Sub-concussive head impacts from heading footballs do not acutely alter brain excitability as compared to a control group

2024· article· en· W4401216566 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Raphaël Hamel, Baptiste Maxime Waltzing, Tom Massey, James Blenkinsop, Leah McConnell, Kieran Osborne, Karamo Sesay, Finn Stoneman, J. Adam Carter, Hajar Maaroufi, Ned Jenkinson

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologies
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationConcussionMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationHuman brainRivermead post-concussion symptoms questionnairePsychologyPhysical therapyTraumatic brain injuryPoison controlInjury preventionStimulationInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Repeated sub-concussive head impacts are a growing brain health concern, but their possible biomarkers remain elusive. One impediment is the lack of a randomised controlled human experimental model to study their effects on the human brain. OBJECTIVES: This work had two objectives. The first one was to provide a randomised controlled human experimental model to study the acute effects of head impacts on brain functions. To achieve this, this work's second objective was to investigate if head impacts from heading footballs acutely alter brain excitability by increasing corticospinal inhibition as compared to a control group. METHODS: In practised and unpractised young healthy adults, transcranial magnetic stimulation was used to assess corticospinal silent period (CSP) duration and corticospinal excitability (CSE) before and immediately after performing headings by returning 20 hand-thrown balls directed to the head (Headings; n = 30) or the dominant foot (Control; n = 30). Moreover, the Rivermead Post-Concussion Questionnaire (RPQ) was used to assess the symptoms of head impacts. Head acceleration was also assessed in subgroups of participants. RESULTS: The intervention lengthened CSP duration in both the Headings (6.4 ± 7.5%) and Control groups (4.6 ± 2.6%), with no difference in lengthening between the two groups. Moreover, CSE was not altered by the intervention and did not differ between groups. However, performing headings increased headaches and dizziness symptoms and resulted in greater head acceleration upon each football throw (12.5 ± 1.9g) as compared to the control intervention (5.5 ± 1.3g). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that head impacts from football headings do not acutely alter brain excitability as compared to a control intervention. However, the results also suggest that the present protocol can be used as an experimental model to investigate the acute effects of head impacts on the human brain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→