Perceived Benefits of Curling in Older Canadian Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global population of older adults is rising, and Canada is no exception. Currently, older adults make up 18.8% of the population and this number is expected to reach 25% in 2068. As a result, there is an increased focus on healthy aging, which has the potential to maintian the quality of life of older adults. A cornerstone of healthy aging is regular participation in physical activities such as sport. In Canada, the sport of curling is popular among older adults, although little is known about its value, particualrly for women. The present study sought to exaine the expereinces of older Canadian women in curling. Seventeen women (average age 62.47 years ± 6.53) were recruited to particiapte in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed and coded suing thematic analysis. Results indicated that participants view of aging was quite nuanced, whereby they simultaneosuly resisted, accepted, and ultimately redefined their conceptulizations of aging. Furthermore, competition and social factors were viewed as integral to the curling experience. In addition, participants appreciated the inclusive nature and strategic requirements of the sport. This study suggests participation in curling, in particular, and sport in general, can play a key role in maximizing health, function, and wellbeing during older life.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".