Leveraging Professional Sports Teams to Encourage Healthy Behavior: A Review of 4 Years of Calgary Flames Health Training Camp Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Professional sporting teams may be well-positioned to act as promoters of health behaviors given their fixture within a community, and association with physical activity, nutrition, and other healthy behaviors. Over 4 years, the Calgary Flames Sport and Entertainment Corporation in conjunction with local health promotion professionals, delivered a health promotion event to the public, The Calgary Flames Health Training Camp (FHTC) in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The purpose of these annual events has been to inspire and encourage healthy behavior uptake and adherence. A description of the FHTC over each of 4 years (2015-2018), lessons learned, and some evaluative work done alongside the event on 2 of the 4 years. In 2017, self-report surveys were administered to event attendees to assess current health status including physical activity, socio-cognitive variables, health information preference, and intention to make healthful behavior change based on event attendance. Biometric data was collected including blood pressure, height, weight, and resting heart rate. Evaluations of the four consecutive events showed that the Calgary Flames Sport and Entertainment Corporation has an ability to attract substantial numbers of the general public to attend FHTC events. Self-report measures from 2017 suggest that already-active populations may be most interested in attending however, the events do appear to inspire attendees to consider behavioral changes for health. The events helped to identify individuals with health risks requiring medical attention but has not yet resulted in known behavior changes. Positive community health impacts may arise from collaboration between health promoters and professional sporting organizations.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".