MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Measuring Objective Brain Vital Signs In Elite Ice Hockey Players

2024· article· en· W4402663396 on OpenAlexaff
Shaquile Nijjer, Eric D. Kirby, Katherine Jones, Tory O. Frizzell, Ryan C.N. D’Arcy

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEliteIce hockeyVital signsPsychologyAeronauticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimizing athlete performance has made leaps in the physical domain with teams employing specialists to aid in athlete nutrition and training. Building on this, the importance of cognitive performance in high-level athletes has gained prominence in sports sciences, prompting investigations into the neural underpinnings of athletic excellence. PURPOSE: The present study involved a retrospective analysis of brain vital signs from Junior A ice hockey players to evaluate whether modulation of brain vital signs may be an indicator of cognitive performance optimization. METHODS: Neurophysiological event-related potentials (ERPs) were extracted using the brain vital signs framework, which quantifies auditory sensation (N100), basic attention (P300), and cognitive processing (N400) within a standardized clinical report. Brain vital signs monitoring enabled point-of-care evaluation in 348 athletes for 17 teams across an elite ice hockey league as a baseline scan (as well as 34 players taking part in an All-Star Combine scan). A retrospective analysis focused on neurophysiological differences across competitive environments (All-Star Combine), cognitive training groups, and different player positions. All normally distributed data were evaluated with multivariate analysis of variance testing. Non-normal data were evaluated with the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: The competitive environment scans revealed significantly reduced N400 latency for forwards versus defensemen (397 ± 62 ms vs. 456 ± 69 ms, p < 0.05) that were not present in baseline scans. Cognitive training analyses revealed a multivariate main effect of group (p < 0.05), driven by the performance training group exhibiting a greater N400 amplitude than the untrained control group (3.0 ± 0.7uV vs. 2.1 ± 0.8uV, p < 0.05). The league-wide scans revealed a main effect of player position (p < 0.05). This revealed significant effects of position on N100 latency (p < 0.05) and P300 amplitude (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The current study reveals potential to enhance cognitive performance in elite, high-contact sport athletes, informing cognitive demands and player safety strategies. Objective neurophysiological evaluation offers diverse avenues for performance training and optimization.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury Research→French-language works237,207→