Examining prolonged sport participation among Special Olympics Ontario athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport participation is associated with extensive positive developmental outcomes among typically developing youth (Fraser-Thomas et al., 2005); however, benefits may be even greater for youth with intellectual disabilities (ID) given unique physical and psychosocial considerations within this population (Hinckson et al., 2013). As such, this study examined factors associated with prolonged participation in and dropout from sport among youth with ID, using the Developmental Model of Sport Participation (DMSP; Cote & Fraser-Thomas, 2016) as a guiding framework of inquiry. Participants included 345 caregivers (81% mothers) of youth and young adult athletes with ID, recruited through Special Olympics (SO) Ontario. SO is a national sport organization, which aims to enrich the lives of individuals with ID through sport training and competitions. Caregivers completed an online survey in 2012, with provincial registry information from 2015 used to determine active athletes three years later. A multiple logistic regression analysis examined demographic, training, and psychosocial factors in relation to prolonged participation or dropout. Results showed a significant difference between those who dropped out and those who remained active, in terms of frequency of involvement. Specifically, those who participated in SO often (i.e., at least once per week) were nearly nine times more likely to stay involved than those who participated occasionally (i.e., less than once per week) (OR=8.82, 95% CI, 2.42-32.16). Findings are discussed within the context of previous sport development and ID literature, while implications for optimizing prolonged participation among youth with ID are explored.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".