At Promise, Not At Risk: A Literature Review of Special Olympics Impact on Early Childhood Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2024 Raising Canada report identifies limited physical activity and play as a significant threat to children’s well-being in Canada. This threat is even greater for children and youth with intellectual disabilities who face heightened health disparities compared to their peers without disabilities. Special Olympics, a global sports organization for individuals with intellectual disabilities, provides a valuable opportunity to address this threat by facilitating diverse physical activity experiences. This paper critically examines 17 empirical, peer-reviewed studies on the health outcomes of children and youth with intellectual disabilities who participate in Special Olympics. Through an analysis of the medical and social models of disability, as well as the theoretical framework of disabled children’s childhood studies, the review identifies key gaps, controversies, strengths, and limitations in the existing literature. It concludes by offering practical implications for families, educators, and practitioners to better support physical activity opportunities for this population, advocating for a fundamental shift in the application of children’s rights to promote greater social inclusion and more equitable approaches to health and well-being.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".