Are we leveling the playing field? Trends and disparities in sports participation among sexual minority youth in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sports participation and physical fitness are widely beneficial for young people, yet activity levels among young people are declining. Despite growing popular media attention on the participation of sexual minority (e.g., lesbian, gay, and bisexual) youth in sports and various campaigns to improve the often homophobic climate of sports, there is limited evidence that sexual minority youth participate in sports. Our aim was to provide a current portrait of sports participation among 3 groups of sexual minority youth (e.g., lesbian, gay, and bisexual) in British Columbia, Canada, as well as to document population trends. METHODS: = 99,373) were used to examine trends and disparities in sports participation among sexual minority and heterosexual youth. Age-adjusted logistic regression models were used to examine changes in participation over time and disparities in participation over time (1998-2013). RESULTS: We found an overall decline in sports participation and physical activity (PA) for all youth. Sexual minority students were less likely to participate in formal sports (with a coach) and informal sports (without a coach) compared with their heterosexual peers. The disparity in participating in informal sports between heterosexual and sexual minority youth has narrowed over time for some sexual orientation groups, whereas the disparity in participating in formal sports has widened over time in some cases. CONCLUSION: This study provides a comprehensive examination of sports participation among sexual minority youth over the past 15 years. Despite changing societal attitudes and laudable efforts to reduce homophobia in sports, results suggest that there are continued barriers to participation for sexual minority youth. Further research is needed to understand the factors that limit sports participation for these youth and to inform program development. PA is critical to lifelong health and well-being, and thus continued efforts are needed to increase the sports participation of sexual minority youth in particular.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".