|
|
Pinchbeck, G. L., Clegg, P. D., Proudman, C. J., Morgan, K. L., & French, N. P. (2003). Case-control study to investigate risk factors for horse falls in hurdle racing in England and Wales. Vet. Rec., 152(19), 583–587.
Abstract: Between March 1, 2000 and August 31, 2001, a case-control study was conducted on 12 racecourses in England and Wales to identify and quantify the risk factors associated with horse falls in hurdle races. The cases and controls were defined so that variables relating to the horse, the jockey, the race and racecourse, and the jump could be considered. The cases were defined as a jumping effort at a hurdle flight that resulted in a fall, and the controls were defined as a successful jump over a hurdle at any of the 12 racecourses within 14 days before or after the case fall. Conditional logistic regression was used to examine the univariable and multivariable relationships between the predictor variables and the risk of falling. The risk of falling was significantly associated with the position of the jump in the race, and with the distance and speed of the race. A horse's previous racing experience and history were also significantly associated with the risk of falling and horses participating in their first hurdle race were at almost five times greater risk of falling than horses that had hurdled before.
|
|
|
|
Murray, J. K., Singer, E. R., Morgan, K. L., Proudman, C. J., & French, N. P. (2004). Memory decay and performance-related information bias in the reporting of scores by event riders. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 63(3-4), 173–182.
Abstract: We used data from a case-control study investigating risk factors for horse falls in the cross-country phase of eventing in Great Britain (GB) to examine evidence for memory decay and information bias. Responses to two questions obtained by telephone for 173 cases and 521 controls were examined for evidence of differential reporting according to the respondent's case-control status and performance in the dressage and cross-country phases of competitions. Information bias was found in the accuracy of reporting dressage penalty scores when analysed as a function of performance level (good/poor). Poor dressage performers were less likely to report accurate dressage scores than good performers. The accuracy of reporting dressage scores decreased as the time between the event and questionnaire completion increased, with no case-control interaction. Competitors who incurred cross-country jumping penalties at the event preceding the selected event reported their cross-country scores with less accuracy when compared with competitors who incurred no penalties. No information bias was found when the reporting of dressage and cross-country scores were analysed as a function of respondent category (case/control).
|
|
