Medical Practitioners’ Major Multisport Event Volunteering Experiences
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical volunteers are essential to the success of major multisport events (MMSE), yet their experience has not been thoroughly examined. Framed by social exchange theory (SET), this study addresses this gap by examining the perceived benefits and costs of medical volunteers’ MMSE engagement. An online anonymous survey was completed by 78 Canadian medical practitioners who had volunteered at a MMSE in the previous 6 years. Professional identification and networking yet personal inconveniences to family, work, or vacation time were experienced to the greatest extent by the medical volunteers. Professional development and networking were significant positive predictors of the medical volunteers’ future volunteering intentions, yet their medical work at the event was a deterrent to engaging with another MMSE. The medical volunteers’ high reported likelihood of volunteering again likely involves balancing these experiences. The findings highlight several considerations for the effective event management of this critical cohort of volunteers.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 it