MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409218148 · doi:10.1080/14763141.2025.2471804

Characterising biomechanical and situational aspects of high magnitude subconcussive impacts in Canadian collegiate football

2025· article· en· W4409218148 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kristen L. Lacelle, Mario D. Bassi, Allen A. Champagne, Emile Peponoulas, Kaden T. Shearer, Blaire T. Magee, Nicole S. Coverdale, Douglas J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueSports Biomechanics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports injuries and prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSoutheastern Ontario Academic Medical Organization
KeywordsFootballMagnitude (astronomy)PsychologyAeronauticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringGeographyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to characterise high magnitude subconcussive impacts in Canadian football to identify injurious relationships between player/game-based characteristics, impact magnitude, and frequency. Eighty-one male university-level football players were equipped with helmet accelerometers to capture peak linear acceleration (PLA), impact frequency, and helmet impact location. Impacts with PLA ≥ 60 g were included in this analysis. Video footage from 15 games over three seasons was analysed to characterise aspects of play including play type, position, closing distance, tackling versus blocking, and impact. Impacts occurring at the left outside boundary of the field resulted in significantly higher linear accelerations. Impacts with a closing distance of ≥10 yards resulted in higher PLA compared to <10 yards and occurred most frequently in run plays. Helmet-to-body impacts generated significantly higher PLA compared to helmet-to-helmet, though helmet-to-helmet occurred more often. Players being tackled sustained significantly higher PLAs than those blocking. The results of this work suggest that the left outside boundary is an area of importance for spotters looking to identify high-risk impacts. Further, rules regarding offensive backfield running starts could be adjusted to decrease the risk of impact after a larger closing distance.

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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSports BiomechanicsSame topicSports injuries and preventionFrench-language works237,207