135: Assessing the Accuracy of Physical Literacy Screening Tasks with the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Physical literacy is a child's capacity to achieve a healthy, active lifestyle. Leaders in healthcare and allied-health (health) are important partners for identifying children with physical literacy deficits. Current physical literacy assessments are time consuming and require resources not typically available in health settings. We sought to develop and evaluate physical literacy screening tasks that would be suitable for health professionals in a variety of settings. The goal was to enable health professionals to quickly and accurately identify children in the lowest 10th percentile of physical literacy scores. Children, eight to 12 years, were recruited from recreation, education and health settings. They performed the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (CAPL), a detailed assessment of a child's capacity for a physically active lifestyle. Children also answered simple questions about their own physical activity and performed eight potential physical literacy screening tasks, including one test of strength, two balance tests, one endurance test, and four motor skills assessments. Children were grouped as above/below the 10th percentile for CAPL score. Sensitivity and specificity scores for each screening task, and for combined pairs of screening tasks were calculated based on the 10th percentile groups. Study protocols were completed by 105 children (52.4% female). Sensitivity of individual test items to identify children below the 10th percentile for CAPL score ranged from 60% to 100%. Specificity for individual scores ranged from 9.6% to 87.8%. Two combination protocols were identified as having high specificity and sensitivity. Each combination contained two screening tasks: a) holding a one-leg balance test on the left leg for less than 34 seconds and a wall sit for less than 33 seconds (80.0% sensitivity, 93.3% specificity), and b) holding a one-leg balance test on the left leg for less than 40 seconds and self-reporting an activity level, as compared to their peers, below 6 out of 10 (60.0% sensitivity, 93.0% specificity). The positive predictive value of these protocols was high (98.8% and 97.9%, respectively). Two sensitive and specific physical literacy screening protocols for children eight to 12 years of age were identified for health settings. Reliability of the screening protocols and effectiveness of the screening task educational materials are on-going. Future research should evaluate the suitability of the screening tasks for children with identified disabilities/chronic illnesses, and the ability of healthcare and allied-health professionals to implement the screening tasks and utilize the results obtained for patient care.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,015 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».