MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308602242 · doi:10.3389/fphys.2022.967661

A tale of two stories: COVID-19 and disability. A critical scoping review of the literature on the effects of the pandemic among athletes with disabilities and para-athletes

2022· article· en· W4308602242 on OpenAlex
Luca Puce, Khaled Trabelsi, Achraf Ammar, Georges Jabbour, Lucio Marinelli, Laura Mori, Jude Dzevela Kong, Christina Tsigalou, Filippo Cotellessa, Cristina Schenone, Mohammad Hossein Samanipour, Carlo Biz, Pietro Ruggieri, Carlo Trompetto, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAthletesPandemicObservational studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyCritical appraisalMedicineApplied psychologyPhysical therapyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The still ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted athletes, and, in particular, para-athletes and athletes with disabilities. However, there is no scholarly appraisal on this topic. Therefore, a critical scoping review of the literature was conducted. We were able to retrieve sixteen relevant studies. The sample size ranged from 4 to 183. Most studies were observational, cross-sectional, and questionnaire-based surveys, two studies were interventional, and two were longitudinal. One study was a technical feasibility study. Almost all studies were conducted as single-country studies, with the exception of one multi-country investigation. Five major topics/themes could be identified: namely, 1) impact of COVID-19-induced confinement on training and lifestyles in athletes with disabilities/para-athletes; 2) impact of COVID-19-induced confinement on mental health in athletes with disabilities/para-athletes; 3) impact of COVID-19-induced confinement on performance outcomes in athletes with disabilities/para-athletes; 4) risk of contracting COVID-19 among athletes with disabilities/para-athletes; and, finally, 5) impact of COVID-19 infection on athletes with disabilities/para-athletes. The scholarly literature assessed was highly heterogeneous, with contrasting findings, and various methodological limitations. Based on our considerations, we recommend that standardized, reliable tools should be utilized and new, specific questionnaires should be created, tested for reliability, and validated. High-quality, multi-center, cross-countries, longitudinal surveys should be conducted to overcome current shortcomings. Involving all relevant actors and stakeholders, including various national and international Paralympic Committees, as a few studies have done, is fundamental: community-led, participatory research can help identify gaps in the current knowledge about sports-related practices among the population of athletes with disabilities during an unprecedented period of measures undertaken that have significantly affected everyday life. Moreover, this could advance the field, by capturing the needs of para-athletes and athletes with disabilities and enabling the design of a truly "disability-inclusive response" to COVID-19 and similar future conditions/situations. Furthermore, follow-up studies on COVID-19-infected para-athletes and athletes with disabilities should be conducted. Evidence of long-term effects of COVID-19 is available only for able-bodied athletes, for whom cardiorespiratory residual alterations and mental health issues a long time after COVID-19 have been described.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it