MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415243651 · doi:10.1371/journal.pdig.0001049

Multi-method proof-of-concept evaluation for R2Play: a novel multi-domain return-to-play assessment tool for concussion

2025· article· en· W4415243651 on OpenAlexafffund
Josh Shore, Pavreet K. Gill, Danielle DuPlessis, Andrew Lovell, Andrea Hickling, Emily Lam, Fanny Hotzé, Elaine Biddiss, Shannon E. Scratch

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Digital Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalYork UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of TorontoCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital Foundation
KeywordsUsabilityConcussionPerceived exertionTest (biology)Scale (ratio)Human factors and ergonomicsPoison controlResource (disambiguation)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Return-to-play (RtoP) clearance after concussion typically involves single- and dual-task assessments that do not reflect the speed or complexity of sport. We developed R2Play, a dynamic multi-domain assessment tool for concussion. This study aimed to (1) demonstrate proof of concept for R2Play by evaluating alignment with design objectives (easy to use, fun, sport-like, clinically valuable, resource efficient, and flexible); and (2) document subsequent iterations to R2Play design. A multi-method evaluation was performed wherein clinicians were paired with youth to test R2Play together and complete separate semi-structured interviews. Quantitative metrics included the System Usability Scale (SUS), heart rate (HR), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE), assessment durations, and R2Play completion times, errors, and multi-task cost scores (changes in performance with the introduction of new challenges). Interviews explored perspectives on design objectives, analyzed using content analysis. Participants included five clinicians (n = 2 occupational therapy; n = 1 physiotherapy; n = 1 athletic therapy; n = 1 medicine) and 10 youth (ages 10-22 years). Assessments took 30-40 minutes despite minor technical challenges (e.g., unresponsive equipment). Clinician-rated usability was good-to-excellent (SUS = 81 ± 8.4; 95% CI: 73.6, 88.4) and youth reported that instructions were easy to follow. Moderate-to-high-intensity exertion was achieved (peak HR = 80 ± 11% age-predicted maximal; 95% CI: 77.4%, 88.5%). Multi-task cost scores reflected some aspects of hypothesized level demand loading. Clinicians described R2Play as potentially valuable to assess sport tolerance and enable rich observations of multi-domain skill integration. Tables were constructed to map study findings onto design iterations. This study supports proof-of-concept for R2Play, a new multi-domain concussion assessment tool, and identified areas for improvement, which has informed changes to the design of R2Play before broader evaluation among youth post-concussion.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Digital HealthSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207