Comparison of Concussion Education Programs

All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10. A composite measure created based on the inverse of athlete responses to five questions about their concussion-reporting intention (i.e., whether they would continue playing with a concussion during "the beginning of the season," "a practice," "the middle of the season," "during a championship game," and "at the end of the season").

Athletes answered 23 True/False questions to assess their concussion knowledge modified from previously utilized concussion educational assessments (Rosenbaum et al., 2010). A composite measure of athlete concussion knowledge was created by summing athletes' correct responses and dividing by the number of questions asked. Rosenbaum AM, Arnett PA. The development of a survey to examine knowledge about and attitudes toward concussion in high-school students. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2010;32(1):44-55. doi:10.1080/13803390902806535

All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10. A composite measure created based on athlete responses to six questions about their attitudes towards concussion reporting (i.e., the extent to which an athlete who reports a concussion would be "better off in the long run," "back on the field much faster," "proud even if teammates call me weak," "better off avoiding participation with signs and symptoms of a concussion," not "better off hiding symptoms from a doctor to not stay out as long," and not "better off toughing it out because concussions are just another injury").

All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10. A composite measure created based on athlete responses to two questions assessing perceived reporting norms (i.e., the extent to which the athlete worried "my teammates would think less of me" if he reported a concussion, or needed to "hide my symptoms from my coach").

All primary and secondary outcomes, besides those related to concussion knowledge, were assessed based on athlete responses, on a 10-point Likert type scale ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 10=strongly agree, to specific questions related to that domain. A composite measure for each outcome was created by summing athletes' responses and dividing by the number of questions asked, resulting in outcomes scaled from 1 to 10. A composite measure created based on athlete responses to six questions about their perceived ability and confidence with concussion reporting (i.e., confidence in my ability "to report a concussion," "to help my teammate report a concussion," "to report symptoms of a concussion," "to help my teammate report symptoms of a concussion," "to report symptoms of a concussion, even if I don't think they're that bad," and "to help my teammate report symptoms of a concussion, even if I don't think they're that bad").