Relative age effect in elite Brazilian athletes in different combat sports: an observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The relative age effect (RAE) suggests that, due to maturity, young athletes born in the first quartiles of the year may have advantages over those born in the last quartiles of the year. Thus, it is important to evaluate the RAE in different sports and to consider the particularities of the subdivisions of the sports categories. Objective: To analyze the RAE in the top 20 of the Brazilian rankings in different combat sports. Methods: Observational study that analyzed the national databases for the year 2019 (from categories U-11 to U-18) made publicly available by the Brazilian confederations of karate, taekwondo and fencing. We obtained data on date of birth, age category and body weight of all modalities, type of fencing competition weapon (Epee, Foie and Saber) and type of karate modality (kumite and kata) from the top 20 places in each ranking. The final sample consisted of 1,486 athletes (Age: 14.2 ± 2.3. Male-53.2%. Female-46.8%). To identify the RAE, we performed a contingency analysis and compared the results between the sexes within the same sport. Results: > 0.05). Conclusion: The results showed the existence of a relative age effect in elite athletes ranked (top 20 places in each ranking) only for the sport of fencing and karate kumite.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".