Does Relative Age Influence Organized Sport and Unorganized Physical Activity Participation in a Cohort of Adolescents?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite their prevalence, the longitudinal impacts of relative age effects (RAEs) on sport and other forms of physical activity (PA) are understudied. This study examined longitudinal participation patterns in organized sport (team and individual), unorganized PA, and non-participation with respect to RAEs in a prospective cohort of adolescents. Data from the first 24 cycles of the MATCH study were used for analyses. Elementary students (n = 929) were recruited from 17 schools in Atlantic Canada. Respondents self-reported PA three times/year. Mixed multilevel logistic models compared the likelihood of participating in each context across birth quarter. Chronological age and gender were considered, along with the interaction between chronological and relative age. Individuals born in Quarter 1/Quarter 2 were more likely to report participation in organized team sport but not individual sports. Relatively older participants born in Quarter 2 were more likely to report participation in unorganized PA. Increasing chronological age was associated with decreased participation in organized sport (particularly team-based) and increased non-participation. Gender was not associated with organized sport participation, but girls were under-represented in unorganized PA and more likely to report non-participation. The interaction parameters suggested that RAEs were consistent throughout adolescence in each context. Longitudinal analyses suggest RAEs are context dependent.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".