The meaning of competitive sport in the lives of baby boomers navigating retirement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the year 2030, all baby boomers will have turned 65 and will represent more than 20% of the Canadian population. Within Canada, this aging population is expected to increase healthcare costs by an estimated 50%. Many baby boomers have adopted a proactive approach to long-term health and aging which challenges historical concepts of retirement. Considered a critical time for influencing health-related behaviours, retirement may provide a window for the promotion of sport. Older adults are underrepresented in sport compared to other age groups, yet there is evidence to suggest that sport participation is increasing among the age 65+ group. This study explored the nature of sport participation among baby boomers (who train for and compete in masters sport events) to understand its role in navigating life post retirement. Specifically, this study sought to capture how participation may facilitate social connections, health, and wellbeing among retirees. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with retired baby boomers born between 1946-1965 who regularly participate in sport (e.g., track and field, hockey, tennis). The data captured ideographic descriptions, personal beliefs, and meanings of the role of sport in their lives. Major themes included how sport is a tool in the transition to retirement, the importance of sport for life, and the need for opportunities to engage in meaningful competition. Findings suggest that sport-related social relationships, daily habits, and behaviours contribute to a positive retirement experience which may offer continuity in the health and wellbeing of aging baby boomers.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".