The Forgotten World of Coaching Masters Sport in Portugal: Implications for Research and Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Master (adult) sports can contribute to healthy ageing and increase the quality of life. Nonetheless, few efforts have been deployed to identify and reflect on guidelines for quality master sports coaching in Portugal that can contribute to these outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this critical commentary is to provide insights into the current status of master sports in Portugal, as well as present implications for researchers and practitioners. In Portugal, eligibility for competition is based on age. Master sports is a structured and competitive physical activity that is associated with teams or individuals with a strong emphasis on formal competition across provincial, national, and/or international championships. There exist efforts by the government to have adult sports play a role in contributing to holistic athlete development throughout the lifespan and towards healthy ageing. This is not incompatible with competition, which is a critical component of the Portuguese sports culture. However, competitions may need to be carefully organised and used as a resource for holistic athlete development, focusing on adult athletes’ health and well-being. Moreover, adult sports may also be positioned as non-structured physical activity, as well as by diverse types of competitive events and activities. Moving forward, there is a need to initiate dialogue between all actors of the sports system and identify alternative ways to position, imagine and use master sports in a challenging contemporary landscape.
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 | 0.013 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".