Sport-related concussion and mental health outcomes in elite athletes: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Elite athletes can experience a diverse range of symptoms following post-concussive injury. The impact of sport-related concussion on specific mental health outcomes is unclear in this population. Objective: The aim was to appraise the evidence base regarding the association between sport-related concussion and mental health outcomes in athletes competing at elite and professional levels. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Cinahl databases was conducted. Results: A total of 27 studies met inclusion criteria for review. Most of the included studies (67%, n = 18) were published in 2014 or later. Study methodology and reporting varied markedly. The extant research has been conducted predominantly in North America (USA, n = 23 studies; Canada, n = 3), often in male only (44.4%, n = 12) and college (70.4%, n = 19) samples. Depression is the most commonly studied mental health outcome (70.4%, n = 19 studies). Cross-sectional retrospective studies and studies including a control comparison tend to support an association between concussion exposure and depression symptoms, although several studies report that these symptoms resolved in the medium term (i.e. 1 month) post-concussion. Evidence for anxiety is mixed. There are insufficient studies to draw conclusions for other mental health domains. Conclusion: Consistent with current recommendations to assess mood disturbance in post-concussive examinations, current evidence suggests a link between sports-related concussion and depression symptoms in elite athletes. Causation cannot be determined at this stage of enquiry because of the lack of well-designed, prospective studies. More research is required that considers a range of mental health outcomes in diverse samples of elite athletes/sports.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".