MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Passion and performance anxiety: How it affects the incidence of musculoskeletal disorders in dancers

2024· article· en· W4393187354 on OpenAlexafffund
Justine Benoît-Piau, Nathaly Gaudreault, Robert J. Vallerand, Sylvie Fortin, Christine Guptill, Mélanie Morin

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of sport and exercise · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicDiversity and Impact of Dance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersInstitut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail
KeywordsPassionDanceAnxietyPsychologyIncidence (geometry)Social psychologyPsychiatryArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to examine the association between the incidence of musculoskeletal disorder episodes (MDEs) and obsessive and harmonious passion as well as performance anxiety throughout a dance season, which lasted 38 weeks. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: A total of 118 professional and preprofessional dancers were recruited and assessed at baseline, while 88 completed the follow-up. Their levels of passion and performance anxiety were assessed at the beginning of a dance season using the Passion Scale and the Kenny Music Performance Anxiety Inventory, respectively. To monitor the incidence of MDEs throughout a dance season, dancers were asked to complete a weekly electronic diary. RESULTS: A higher level of obsessive passion was associated with a higher incidence of MDEs causing an interruption of dance activities (β = 0.264, p = 0.022). Harmonious passion and performance anxiety were not associated with MDEs throughout the season. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this study support the role of obsessive passion in the development of MDEs in dancers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.288
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of sport and exerciseSame topicDiversity and Impact of DanceFrench-language works237,207