Training and development of Canadian wheelchair basketball players
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Considering the growth in research, examining the development of mainstream sport athletes over the past two decades, studies examining development of athletes with disabilities have been surprisingly limited. While similarities in developmental trajectories between the two cohorts may exist regarding factors such as the value of practice, which tend to be universal regardless of context, disability‐related issues (e.g. whether the disability was congenital or acquired) may influence the course of development, affecting variables such as starting age, training and developmental milestones. Fifty‐two male and female athletes training with the Wheelchair Basketball Canada National Academy provided detailed training histories. Athletes illustrated similar developmental patterns (e.g. milestones, training adjustments) as they progressed through their sporting career. However, athletes with congenital disabilities started participation in wheelchair basketball and unorganised practice at significantly younger ages ( t 49 = −4.35, p < .001, d = 1.32; t 49 = −3.49, p < .001, d = 1.03, respectively). While athletes with congenital disabilities continued to reach a majority of the sporting milestones at younger ages, athletes with acquired disabilities were able to reach late career milestones (e.g. national debuts) at similar ages. Athletes’ disability severity did not influence their progress through the developmental milestones and time devoted to training throughout their sporting career. Future work may consider examining developmental trajectories and training histories of athletes in various parasports to extend our understanding of their development and skill acquisition.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it