Does High-Performance Sport have an Obligation to Help Former Athletes with their Career and Life Transition?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The popular press is filled with articles chronicling the challenges that many elite athletes encounter while adapting to life after completing their playing days. Do their organizations and leagues owe them a duty of care and help to ensure they can transfer effectively to a different life and career once their competing days are finished? This paper reviews the literature surrounding this transition. The authors examine the recent literature surrounding high-performance athletes’ challenges during and after their sporting careers end. In addition to documenting the potentially adverse experiences, and in the spirit of providing contextual balance, the authors highlight some of the positive outcomes related to high-performance sport involvement and the leadership qualities that can be honed and tempered through the experience. The authors conclude the paper with a series of recommendations to assist future players, team and league officials, and players unions to help reduce the problem. Keywords: high-performance sport, career and life transitions
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it