Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the recent literature (over the past 18 months) regarding psychosocial challenges and clinical concerns among adolescent athletes, and to address the advances made in understanding adolescent athletes' coping processes. RECENT FINDINGS: Coping research has moved from identifying discrete stressors and coping strategies to examining the processes of coping over time. Parents and coaches play an important role in young athletes' sport experiences and athletes' use and development of coping strategies. In terms of clinical concerns, findings regarding the prevalence of disordered eating have been equivocal. However, disordered eating may be of greater concern among athletes participating in 'leanness' sports. Sport participation may contribute to increased alcohol consumption among adolescent athletes but decreased use of drugs and smoking cigarettes, while steroid use appears to be relatively rare compared with athletes' use of alcohol and cigarettes. SUMMARY: The reviewed studies have implications for future research by identifying opportunities for intervention and education regarding clinical and nonclinical psychosocial challenges. Researchers have emphasized the importance of athletes' social context and relationships in coping with psychosocial challenges in sport. One concern is that adolescent athletes' disordered eating and substance use may reflect maladaptive coping. Experimental and intervention research is limited; however, incorporating members of athletes' social network into future research and interventions may be a practical avenue to achieving positive outcomes among adolescent athletes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.005 |
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".