The Role of Sports Psychology in Managing Concussion Recovery and Return to Play
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study explores the role of sports psychology in managing concussion recovery and facilitating athletes’ readiness to return to play. Methods and Materials: A qualitative research design was utilized, involving semi-structured online interviews with athletes who had experienced concussions, sports psychologists, and medical professionals. 36 Participants were recruited through purposeful sampling, and data collection continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using NVivo software through an inductive thematic approach, allowing for the emergence of key themes. Reflexivity and researcher triangulation were employed to ensure the rigor and reliability of the findings. Findings: Four main themes emerged: psychological interventions, mental barriers and facilitators in return to play, the role of support systems, and the long-term psychological impact of concussions. Psychological interventions, such as cognitive-behavioral techniques and mindfulness practices, were effective in reducing anxiety and enhancing resilience. Fear of re-injury and performance anxiety were significant barriers, while confidence restoration and motivation levels facilitated recovery. Social support from family, teammates, and coaches played a crucial role in alleviating psychological distress. The long-term impact included identity crises, chronic symptoms, and ongoing mental health concerns, emphasizing the need for holistic support. Conclusion: The findings underscore the importance of integrating psychological interventions in concussion recovery. Addressing fear, anxiety, and identity loss, while enhancing confidence and social support, is crucial for a successful return to play. This study highlights the necessity for comprehensive recovery protocols that consider both physical and psychological readiness. Practitioners should prioritize individualized psychological assessments and foster supportive environments to improve recovery outcomes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".