MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942420449 · doi:10.1097/jsm.0000000000000665

Canadian Centre for Mental Health and Sport (CCMHS) Position Statement: Principles of Mental Health in Competitive and High-Performance Sport

2019· article· en· W2942420449 on OpenAlexaffabout
Krista J. Van Slingerland, Natalie Durand‐Bush, Lindsay Bradley, Gary S. Goldfield, Roger Archambault, D. E. Smith, Carla Edwards, Samantha Delenardo, Shaunna Taylor, Penny Werthner, Göran Kenttä

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Journal of Sport Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSport Psychology and Performance
Canadian institutionsOkanagan CollegeUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster UniversityCanadian Psychological AssociationCarleton UniversityUniversity of CalgaryMental Health Research CanadaChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMental healthPosition statementAthletesCompetitive athletesMultidisciplinary approachPublic relationsMission statementParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismApplied psychologyPsychologyMedicinePolitical sciencePsychiatrySociologyFamily medicinePhysical therapySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The brave decision made by many Canadian athletes to share their experience with mental illness has fed a growing dialogue surrounding mental health in competitive and high-performance sport. To affect real change for individuals, sport culture must change to meet demands for psychologically safe, supportive, and accepting sport environments. This position statement addresses mental health in competitive and high-performance sport in Canada, presenting solutions to current challenges and laying a foundation for a unified address of mental health by the Canadian sport community. The paper emerged from the first phase of a multidisciplinary Participatory Action Research (PAR) project, in which a sport-focused mental health care model housed within the Canadian Centre for Mental Health and Sport (CCMHS) is currently being designed, implemented, and evaluated by a team of 20 stakeholders, in collaboration with several community partners and advisors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.360 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations96
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Journal of Sport MedicineSame topicSport Psychology and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207