MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2900404402 · doi:10.29173/cjfy29347

Examining the Association between Parent and Child Sport Participation in Canada: A General Social Survey Study

2018· article· en· W2900404402 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Victoria Larocca, Stuart Wilson, Andrea Cavaliere

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la Jeunesse · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespondentPsychological interventionPsychologyAssociation (psychology)Household incomePolitical scienceGeographyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research has shown a relationship between parent sport participation and child sport participation. With a sample of 1,064 respondents from the 2010 General Social Survey, this study examined how child sport participation is associated with parent sport participation, household income, parent education level, and parent sex. Results found that respondents with a child aged 5-12 who participated in sport over the past 12 months were more likely to have done so themselves too. (OR = 4.39, 95% CI = 2.44-7.89, p < 0.001). Significant differences (p < 0.001) were additionally found for the respondent’s education, age, and total household income. However, no significant differences were found for sex (p = 0.13). These results suggest that evidence-based interventions targeted at parents who do not participate in sport may increase children’s participation. Further research is encouraged to take a more holistic approach to analyzing childhood sport participation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Family and Youth / Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la JeunesseSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207