ArticleJournal of athletic training2020
Development of a Peer Education Program to Improve Concussion Knowledge and Reporting in Collegiate Athletes.
Article in Journal of athletic training, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Randomized Controlled Trial of a Novel Peer Concussion-Education Program for Collegiate Athletes.Journal of athletic training · 2020Trial
- Collegiate student-athletes concussion knowledge and attitudes: what a difference a decade Makes.Brain injury · 2024Article
- The SUCCESS Peer Mentoring Program for College Students with Concussion: Preliminary Results of a Mobile Technology Delivered Intervention.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- A Behavior Analytic Interpretation of Concussion Reporting in Athletes: How the Field of Behavior Analysis Can Help Make Athletes Safer.Journal of athletic training · 2023Review
- Prevention of sports-related concussion in soccer: a comprehensive review of the literature.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextA novel peer concussion-education program (PCEP) was developed to enhance concussion knowledge and reporting among collegiate student-athletes.
objectiveTo describe the PCEP and its development and implementation.
designProgram development consisting of a literature review, focus group, and pilot implementation.
settingAthletics department at a college participating at the National Collegiate Athletic Association Division II-sanctioned competition level. PATIENTS OR OTHER
participantsFifteen student-athletes from the women's soccer and men's lacrosse teams participated in the focus group. Four peer concussion educators (PCEs) were debriefed after the pilot implementation of the PCEP with the women's soccer and men's lacrosse teams. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Focus-group data were analyzed qualitatively. The PCEs were debriefed, and responses were organized into recommendation types.
resultsThe literature review contributed information that supported the development of the PCEP's conceptual model. Focus-group results provided information used to train the PCEs and refine the PCEP's education modules. The pilot implementation and PCE debriefing supplied information used to further revise the education modules, PCE training, and PCEP implementation procedure.
conclusionsThe PCEP was developed based on the Theory of Reasoned Action and Planned Behavior and uses a peer-mediated, cognitive-behavioral, and interdisciplinary model to enhance concussion knowledge of and reporting by collegiate student-athletes. After a focus-group discussion and pilot implementation, we revised the PCEP and its education modules and developed an online manual to facilitate broad dissemination.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.