Survey of NCAA Athletic Trainers’ Administration of the National Wrestling Coaches Association Weight Certification Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) implemented a minimum weight certification program in 1997 to help protect wrestlers from dangerous weight loss practices. Despite nearly a quarter of a century of this program, there is no published research detailing the implementation of it. Objective: Determine how the NCAA minimum weight certification is being implemented across Division I programs. Design: Cross-sectional study Setting: Survey Patients or Other Participants: A total of 35 (45.5%) of 77 NCAA division I wrestling athletic trainers responded to the survey. Main Outcome Measure(s): Survey data on how the NCAA minimum weight certification program was implemented at the division I level was collected. Results: Nearly all respondents used athletic trainers to take their measurements. Most staff (74.3%) had five or more years of experience taking the measurements, and only one (2.9%) had less than a year of experience. The time prior to competition that the measurement was taken ranged widely from 2 to 110 days. Nearly all (97.1%) used skinfold calipers, and just one program (2.9%) specified a different method, iDXA scan. Of those using the skinfold calipers, 52.9% used Lange calipers and 32.4% did not know the caliper type. Everyone used the same three measurement locations. Body density was converted to %BF with the Brozek formula at 13% of the institutions, the Siri formula at 4.3% of programs, “other” (defined by respondents as the optimal performance calculator provided by the NWCA) at 13% of schools, and 69.6% did not know. Conclusion: Overall, there appears to be great consistency in the administration of the minimal wrestling weight standards across NCAA Division I wrestling programs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".