Disentangling general and sport-specific risk factors for anxiety and depression in a mixed sample of athletes and non-athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
= 19.7 years; 75.8% female), including 228 athletes and 255 non-athletes, complete self-report measures of personality (alexithymia, sensory processing sensitivity or SPS, and anxiety sensitivity or AS), exposure to emotional abuse in childhood, pandemic-related stress, anxiety, and depression. Recreational and elite athletes scored lower on SPS and depression than non-athletes, and recreational athletes also scored lower than non-athletes on AS. However, involvement in competitive sport did not predict depression or anxiety when other variables were controlled for. Alexithymia, AS, and childhood emotional abuse predicted depression, and SPS, AS, and childhood emotional abuse predicted anxiety. The same pattern was seen in a subgroup of athletes (n = 91) who had recently been coached, except that in this subgroup exposure to emotionally abusive coaching was found to be an additional risk factor for anxiety. These findings help to disentangle general and sport-specific risk factors for anxiety and depression and may have important implications for preventing and treating these problems in athletes and non-athletes alike.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".