Participation in Physical Activity for Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare rates of participation for children (4-9 years of age) with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) with and without externalizing behavior problems (EBPs) with children without disability and to examine mediators of the relation between disability and physical activity participation. Data for this study were drawn from Cycle 7 (2006-07) of the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY). The frequency of children's participation in organized sports or physical activities varied depending on the child's health condition with children with NDDs and both NDDs and EBPs participating least in organized sports or physical activities followed by children with EBPs only. In contrast, there were no statistically significant differences by health group for children's participation in unorganized sports or physical activities. These differences remained even after controlling for the effects of other child and family sociodemographic characteristics, except for children with EBPs only. These findings highlight the importance of considering children's primary and other existing health conditions as well as family sociodemographic characteristics in order to better understand the factors that influence participation in organized physical activities for children with disabilities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".