Assessment Of Sport-specific Motor Performance Profile In High-performance Athletes After A Multi-modal Neurologic Training Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the effects of a two-month standardized, supplementary multi-modal neurologic training program targeting specific intrinsic risk factors of interest identified in the literature, versus usual training, on sport-specific motor performance skills including upper-limb motor function, postural stability, and neck strength. METHODS: Twenty-six male and female high-performance athletes (mean age = 17 ± 3 years), participating in snow sports or ice hockey, completed a pre-season training program (intervention group, IG). The training program encompasses dynamic vision, dynamic neck strength, neuromuscular control, cardiovascular conditioning, psychological resiliency counseling (if required), brain health nutrition and sleep optimization recommendations, and sleep performance eyewear and mouthwear (if indicated). An age-matched control group (CG) completed their usual pre-season training. Both groups completed multi-modal pre- and post-training assessments including a rapid bimanual sensorimotor upper-limb robotic task, a postural stability test using a phybrata sensor, and a dynamic neck strength assessment using novel technology. Pre/post-training test parameters for each group were compared using a paired t-test with corrections applied for multiple tests within each test. RESULTS: The IG exhibited a statistically significant increase in dominant hand speed (t(25) = -2.5556, p = 0.0171) while performing the sensorimotor robotic task compared to CG. Moreover, the IG showed a significant decrease in time (t(18) = 4.0572, p = 0.0007) and increase in peak rate of force development (t(18) = -3.8327, p = 0.0012), whereas CG showed only a reduction in time (t(43) = 2.2549, p = 0.0293) required for 30 neck rotations in a counterclockwise direction during the dynamic neck strength assessment. The postural stability assessment did not reveal a statistically significant difference in either group. CONCLUSION: A standardized two-month supplementary pre-season neurologic training program has a positive effect on motor performance skills such as hand speed and dynamic neck strength in high-performance winter sports athletes that have been identified as vital motor skills to reduce concussion risk. This work was funded by Own the Podium Canada, the Canadian Sport Institute Calgary; and a Mitacs fellowship in partnership with Own the Podium Canada (Dr. Maryam). We thank the participating athletes, coaches, and team athletic therapists.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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, 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".