Health promotion expectations and perceptions of sport club participants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To develop health promotion (HP) in sports clubs (SCs), stakeholders need to know the HP expectations of sports participants. However, the literature does not provide information on these aspects, which exacerbates the difficulty for SCs to provide an environment, activities and organization that promote health and to play the role entrusted to them in the integration of vulnerable populations. To fill this gap, this study explores the HP expectations and perceptions of sports participants, with a particular focus on ethnocultural characteristics, and documents participants' understanding of HP. A descriptive qualitative study comprising semi-structured interviews was carried out with 22 French and Quebec sports participants. Because they have little experience with HP in their SC, participants do not seem to have many expectations of their SC in terms of HP. Nevertheless, they felt that SCs can play an important role in health and suggested several themes and types of action, such as seminars on nutrition, activities outside the SC to develop cohesion or health monitoring. Sports participants from ethnocultural minorities seem to appreciate the programs designed to integrate them. There is a predominantly physical conception of health and the contribution of SCs to health, and the relationship between the types of health determinants (economic, environmental, organizational and social) and health is not clear. This study shows that the idea of a health-promoting SC appeals to SC participants, but this approach has not yet taken root in this setting or in society as a whole.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".