Impact of adverse childhood experiences on concussion recovery: Findings from the Toronto concussion study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated whether exposure to adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) were correlated with the duration or severity of post-concussion symptoms. Participants referred to The Hull-Ellis Concussion and Research Clinic within 1 week of injury were followed for up to 16 weeks. Recovery from concussion was determined by a physician assessment of physical, cognitive, and sensory functioning. Symptom endorsement was quantified using the Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 3 (SCAT3) and ACEs with the ACE Questionnaire. Data from 256 participants were analyzed. There was no significant relationship between ACE scores and time to recovery (ρ = 0.18, p = 0.81). However, secondary analyses found significant associations at week 1 between ACEs and SCAT symptoms and severity (ρ = 0.18, p = 0.004; ρ = 0.19, p = 0.002). Exposure to ACEs may sensitize individuals to concussion symptom endorsement in the acute stages but do not appear to prolong recovery from concussion. These findings support that clinicians should be aware of the impact of childhood traumas on an individual’s health and assist in tailoring and providing individualized treatment plans, education and resources 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".