Mental health concerns and parental help-seeking in elite youth sport: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In elite youth sport, athletes are exposed to a number of potential challenges and concerns, such as the potential for injury, competitive pressure from other stakeholders, and engaging in risky behaviours. Provided that coaches often have a difficult time detecting and monitoring their athletes’ mental health, parents may have an important role for their athletes’ help-seeking intentions and behaviours. The purpose of this review is to understand the mental health concerns of elite youth athletes and parents’ role in help-seeking for mental health concerns. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic search using four databases to locate empirical literature that report parents’ role in their young elite athletes’ mental health concerns. A total of 1956 articles were retrieved and screened, and the resulting included articles were then subject to data extraction and analysis. Information related to study aims, participant demographics, operationalization of elite youth sport, methodological approaches, study findings, and limitations were of analytic interest. Included articles predominantly explored adjacent mental health topics, highlighting the lack of explicit investigations of parental help-seeking in elite youth sport. Additionally, included articles seldomly used theory or guiding frameworks to support their investigations. The limited scope and volume of included articles highlight the nascency of the field, while also highlighting an opportunity to leverage currently available frameworks in developmental psychology to study parental help-seeking with elite youth athletes. Potential frameworks and ways forward for the field are discussed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".