Recommendations for cardiac screening and emergency action planning in youth football: a FIFA consensus statement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sudden cardiac death is the leading medical cause of death among football players. Determining the optimal cardiac screening, the use of carefully selected medical assessments to detect underlying cardiovascular conditions associated with sudden cardiac arrest/death, is a desired objective of the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) for football players of all ages. To date, cardiac screening recommendations in football have primarily focused on adult competitive players. Acknowledging its responsibility for player health worldwide, FIFA convened an international working group of cardiology and sports medicine experts to develop cardiac screening recommendations for youth football players. This group performed structured literature reviews and ultimately congregated in January of 2024, when recommendations were presented, scrutinised and judged using a systematic process. The final FIFA recommendations for youth cardiac screening include personal medical history, family medical history, focused physical examination and resting 12-lead electrocardiography. This document provides detailed rationale and clinical recommendations for youth cardiac screening and emphasises the importance of emergency action planning.
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 | 0.068 | 0.099 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.007 |
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".