The Nature and Control of Postural Adaptations of Boys with and Without Developmental Coordination Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compared the nature of postural adaptations and control tendencies, between 7 (n = 9) and 11-year-old boys (n = 10) with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) and age-matched, younger (n = 10) and older (n = 9) peers in a leaning task. Examination of anterior-posterior, medio-lateral, maximum and mean area of sway, and path length revealed one significant interaction as older, unaffected boys swayed more than all other groups (p < .01). As a group, boys with DCD displayed smaller anterior-posterior (p < .01) and area of sway (p < .01). Analysis of relative time spent in the corrective phase (p < .002) revealed that boys with DCD spent 54% under feedback control while boys without DCD spent 78%. This was attributed to reduced proprioceptive sensitivity, as confirmed by significant differences between the groups (p < .009) in spectral analysis of peak frequency of sway.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".