Sports Participation and Nonparticipation in Children With Hearing Loss
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Given that organized sports have the potential to improve psychosocial outcomes in children with hearing loss, the purpose of this exploratory pilot study is to document factors associated with sports participation and nonparticipation for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Defining the associated factors could lead to identifying strategies to mitigate barriers and improve access to organized sports participation for this population. Method: A 36-item parent survey was created to explore and quantify the sports-related experiences of children with hearing loss and their families. The final survey items focused on caregiver demographic information, child hearing status, hearing technology usage, daily life, physical activity, sports participation, socialization during physical activity, and barriers to physical activity. Results: Caregivers ( N = 100) reported their children were participating in a variety of sports with the greatest participation percentages for basketball, swimming, and soccer. Factors most important to caregivers of children who participated in organized sports included the child's interest in the sport, self-confidence, self-advocacy skills, ability to communicate, and support/inclusion from teammates and coaches. Child disinterest in sports was the primary reason some children did not participate in sports followed by lack of self-confidence and social inclusion, fear of embarrassment, and physical limitations from hearing loss or another disability. The use or nonuse of hearing technology does not appear to impact sports participation for children with hearing loss, but several parents were concerned about the inability to use technology during swimming and with helmets. Conclusions: The results of this exploratory study suggest that child interest, psychosocial factors, and coach/teammate knowledge may impact organized sports participation or nonparticipation. Training programs and information materials may increase and address issues children with hearing loss face when considering participation in organized sports.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".