Interpersonal Violence in Belgian Sport Today: Young Athletes Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Initiatives to safeguard athletes from interpersonal violence (IV) are rapidly growing. In Belgium, knowledge on the magnitude of IV in sport is based on one retrospective prevalence study from 2016 (n = 2.043 adults), involving those who had participated in organized sport for up to 18 years. Data on victimization rates in current youth sport populations are lacking. This study aimed to investigate the magnitude of IV in a sample of 769 athletes (aged between 13 and 21), using the Violence Towards Athletes Questionnaire (VTAQ). All types of IV were prevalent in this sample, ranging from 27% (sexual violence) to 79% (psychological violence and neglect). Boys reported significantly more physical violence, while girls reported significantly more sexual violence. IV perpetrated by peer athletes was reported to the same degree as IV perpetrated by a coach (70%), while IV perpetrated by a parent in the context of sport was somewhat less common, but still prevalent (48%). These findings, including factors associated with elevated exposure rates, can serve as a baseline measurement to monitor and evaluate current and future safeguarding interventions in Belgian sport.
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 | 0.008 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".