Should toddlers and preschoolers participate in organized sport? A scoping review of developmental outcomes associated with young children’s sport participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organized sport is offered at increasingly younger ages, with many programs geared towards preschoolers, toddlers, and infants. While sport is promoted as an amendable context for healthy development of school-age children, little is empirically known about potential benefits or risks associated with organized sport participation in early childhood. A scoping review of nine electronic databases identified English-language, peer-reviewed, original research articles which addressed psychological, emotional, social, cognitive, or intellectual developmental outcomes of organized sport involvement of children aged 2–5 years; included studies were appraised for quality. Findings offer preliminary evidence that early sport participation is related to primarily positive outcomes (e.g. enhanced social skills, pro-social behaviours, self-regulation), while negative and inconclusive outcomes were also identified. Results suggest limited existing research has primarily relied on parent or teacher proxy-report or assessment, and reinforces that little is known about toddler and preschooler organized sport participation as a distinct form of physical activity, despite pervasive availability of programming, and positive parental perceptions of early enrolment. Additional research with stronger methodological design and rigor is needed; recommendations to enhance the quality of future studies with young children are discussed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".