MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996133445 · doi:10.1080/j006v26n01_02

Gender Differences in the Attainment of Motor Skills on the Movement Assessment Battery for Children

2006· article· en· W1996133445 on OpenAlexaff
Kathryn Anne Junaid, Sandra Fellowes

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsSurrey Memorial Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovement assessmentMotor skillPsychologyAnalysis of varianceTest (biology)Psychomotor learningDevelopmental psychologyGross motor skillPhysical therapyMedicineCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Differences in the age of attainment of motor skills between boys and girls have been established in previous studies. It has been noted that boys develop ball skills earlier than girls and that girls acquire manual dexterity before boys. The purpose of this study was to determine if the same differences could be identified in a group of typically developing seven and eight year old children using the Movement Assessment Battery for Children Test (MABC Test). In this study, a physiotherapist administered the MABC Test to 103 randomly selected children (boys-60, girls-43). The MABC Test examines children's motor skills in the areas of manual dexterity, ball skills and balance. Results were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). The ANOVA results indicated significant differences between boys' and girls' ball skill scores and manual dexterity scores.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations96
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In PediatricsSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207