Search

Objectives: This study aimed to build on previous work by the authors. It examines how socioecological level and gender influence high-performance sport system (HPSS) stakeholders' perspectives of the relative importance and feasibility to address athlete attrition factors within an Australian high-performance pathway system (HPPS)., Design: Mixed methods., Methods: Sub-analysis was conducted of rating data from 30 participants who had contributed to identifying 83 statements in 13 clusters in a previous Concept Mapping study. The 13 clusters were statistically analysed in 'R' using cumulative link mixed models (CLMMs) to determine differences in perceived importance and feasibility between 1) socioecological levels, and 2) genders., Results: Mean ratings for 11 and three of the 13 clusters were statistically significantly different between at least two of the five socioecological levels, for importance and feasibility, respectively. Athletes had the largest variation in mean ratings from the most (athlete health 4.59), to least (performance potential 2.83) important cluster, when compared to the other four socioecological levels. There were statistically significant differences between the ratings between genders (Men/Women) for two clusters for each rating scale: Importance: 'athlete health' (M3.33:W3.84 [p 0.012]); 'performance potential' (M3.35:W2.57; [p 0.001]), Feasibility: 'abuse and mismanagement of health' (M2.97:W3.68; [p 0.000]) and 'athlete health' (M2.54:W3.33; [p 0.000])., Conclusions: This study highlights the need to implement more robust athlete attrition monitoring protocols. It also highlights the importance of listening to youth athletes' voices, and enabling equal gender representation to ensure holistically tailored environments are created to retain talented athletes in high-performance pathway programmes., Competing Interests: Declaration of interest statement MD and RA worked at an Australian Institute of Sport; and KM and SG worked at the NSW institute of Sport at the commencement of this study. These institutes did not influence or approve the final version of this manuscript. No other conflict of interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Primary: To gain a system-wide perspective on factors leading to athlete attrition from a high-performance sport system (HPSS). Secondary: To identify what a sample of system-wide stakeholders and past athletes value as the most important and feasible attrition factors to address to retain talented athletes., Design: Mixed-methods., Methods: Concept mapping was used for qualitative data collection and quantitative data analysis. Sixty-one participants including: (i) past athletes from an Australian state sporting institute; (ii) their families; and (iii) internal and external stakeholders to a HPSS who supported past athletes., Results: Participants brainstormed 83 unique statements (i.e. attrition factors) that were mapped into 13 clusters of attrition factors following multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analysis performed on the participants sorting data: 'abuse and mismanagement of health'; 'athlete health'; 'limited support/resourcing'; 'coaching'; 'inconsistent processes'; 'financial and career support'; 'pathway structure'; 'organisational dynamics'; 'competitive stress'; 'performance potential'; 'challenges with selection and transition'; 'psychological state'; and 'competing non-sport priorities'. 'Abuse and mismanagement of health' had the highest mean importance (3.76 out of 5) and feasibility (3.31) rating. The 13 clusters were further grouped into four overarching domains: 'sport system policy, structure and processes'; 'pathway structure, transition and support'; 'individual athlete health and capability'; and 'whole-of-life demands and priorities'. The domain 'sport system policy, structure and processes' contained the most important and feasible clusters., Conclusions: Macro (system-level) and micro (intrapersonal and interpersonal) level athlete attrition factors should be considered together. Athlete health was considered the most important athlete retention issue to address., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)