Magnitude and Risk Factors for Interpersonal Violence Experienced by Canadian Teenagers in the Sport Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies demonstrate that interpersonal violence toward athletes (VTA) is a significant problem in some countries. However, in Canada, little scientific evidence on the prevalence of this issue exists. The objective of this study was to describe the magnitude of interpersonal violence toward young Canadian athletes in the context of sport and to explore associated risk factors. A total of 1,055 athletes, aged between 14 and 17 years, anonymously completed an online survey about their experiences of various types of interpersonal violence in sport. The sample consisted of 763 girls and 292 boys, with a mean age of 15.3 ± 1.1 years. Results showed that 79.2% of athletes reported at least one experience of psychological violence followed by 39.9% reporting physical violence, 35.7% reporting neglect, and 28.2% sexual violence. Being older, being a girl, having specialized in a sport early on, and a high number of hours of weekly practice were related to higher odds of reporting psychological violence or neglect. Being older, being a boy, reporting a nonheterosexual sexual preference, greater number of hours of weekly practice, being in an interregional or provincial sport level, and practicing only team sports were related to higher odds of reporting physical violence. Reporting a nonheterosexual sexual preference and being in an interregional or international sport level were associated with higher odds of reporting sexual violence. In conclusion, this study shows that VTA, particularly psychological violence and neglect, is a serious problem in youth sport in Canada. These results may help to influence public decision makers to intervene and develop and implement strategies to prevent VTA.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".