MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042040980 · doi:10.1177/000841740407100205

Can I Play Too? Physical Activity Engagement of Children with Developmental Coordination Disorders

2004· article· en· W2042040980 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anne A. Poulsen, Jenny Ziviani

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMultitudePsychological interventionPhysical activityMotor coordinationDevelopmental psychologyIntervention (counseling)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Children with developmental coordination disorders (DCD) are less physically active and have significantly different patterns of social and physical play than their well-coordinated peers. FACTORS: The impact of motor incoordination on physical activity engagements throughout life is influenced by a multitude of factors. External factors such as the social, cultural and physical environment may act as either supports or barriers to active physical involvement. Individual characteristics including the unique physical and psychological attributes of the child with motor coordination difficulties also impact on engagement in physically active occupations. RESULT: A model is proposed that conceptualizes the multiple dimensions which impinge on the decisions to select, engage and persist in physical activities for children with developmental coordination disorders. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The occupational therapist's role in promoting a balanced and physically active lifestyle is explored. Interventions to increase physical activity participation for children with DCD are dependent on a full understanding of the complex, multi-dimensional correlates of occupational engagement.

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)0.004
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations90
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207