Sports and Recreational Activities as a Means of Reintegration of Female Convicts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The male-to-female ratio in the prison system is disproportionate. The number of women serving prison sentences is small compared to men. Women make up 10%–15% of the global prison population, while in Serbia the figure stands at 4.2%. This fact is of significant importance because facilities for women are allocated far fewer resources than those for men, resulting in much worse conditions in female correctional facilities. The short-term and longterm benefits of physical activity are numerous, both for mental and physical health. However, there has been little research assessing the levels of physical activity among women sentenced to imprisonment. For instance, in the United Kingdom, 48% of women in female prisons participated in physical activities on average. In Australia, half of female prisoners reported engaging in daily exercise. In a French prison, 60% of women were minimally or highly active, while 57% of women in Canadian prisons engaged in some form of physical activity. According to research conducted in Serbia in 2021, in the Correctional Facility for Women in Požarevac, 51 women played basketball and volleyball, while 14 played chess across all wards (open, semi-open, and closed). By 2023, the situation had significantly improved, with the highest interest recorded in aerobics (87 individuals), volleyball (70 individuals), and table tennis (40 individuals), while interest in chess was the lowest (4 individuals). International legislation stipulates that prisoners, although deprived of their freedom during their sentence, should not lose other rights, including the right to engage in sports and physical activities, the possibility of education, retraining, and other activities offered by the prison itself. Research indicates that sport contributes not only to improved physical health but also to the social integration of those who engage in it.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".