Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine Position Paper: The Clinician’s Role in Addressing and Preventing Maltreatment in Sport—10-year Anniversary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: In 2011, the Canadian Academy of Sport and Exercise Medicine released their first position paper on Abuse, Harassment, and Bullying in Sport. Since this time, there have been significant advancements within the global sport landscape, including the emergence of regulatory bodies and initiatives aimed at prioritizing athletes' health and well-being. While the shift to a more proactive approach for safeguarding athletes is evident and promising, athletes continue to be affected by cases of maltreatment. To advance safe sport, it is critical that all supporters of safe and healthy performance are aware of their roles and responsibilities for preventing and addressing maltreatment, including the Canadian sport medicine community. In this updated position statement, recent advancements in research on issues of maltreatment are summarized and specific recommendations are provided on how the medical community can contribute to appropriately identifying, treating, and preventing harm in sport, as well as their role in advocating for the health and well-being of athletes in their care.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.009 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".