Cardiovascular Fitness of Young Canadian Children with and without Mental Retardation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with mental retardation (MR) typically exhibit lower levels of cardiovascular fitness than their non-disabled peers. However, there seems to be a gap in the literature with respect to comparative studies between younger children with and without MR. The present investigation compared cardiovascular fitness levels of youth with and without MR. Sixty youth (30 with MR, 30 non-disabled) performed a 20-m shuttle run designed to assess cardiovascular fitness. Results indicated that non-disabled children exhibited significantly greater levels of aerobic fitness than did those with MR. Findings illustrate the need for critical examination of physical activity programs for children with MR, as lags in fitness evidenced versus non-disabled peers approximately 50 years ago still exist. The study of health-related physical fitness (HRPF) among persons with mental retarda- tion (MR) is an area that has undergone crit- ical examination over the past half-century. Francis and Rarick (1959) conducted the sem- inal investigation into the HRPF characteris- tics of individuals with MR. They explored fitness and motor performance of children and adolescents with MR concerning the vari- ables of age, gender, and comparison with non-disabled children. The finding concern- ing comparison with non-disabled individuals provided a foundation for future understand- ing of how individuals with MR differentiate in terms of their fitness levels versus non-dis- abled persons. Their overall conclusion in this area has been widely quoted in subsequent works: In general, it can be stated that with the mentally retarded children studied, the means of both boys and girls on most mea- sures were two to four years behind the published age norms of normal children. Furthermore, the discrepancy between the normal and mentally retarded tended to increase with each advancing age level (p. 810). In the almost 50 years since Francis and Rarick (1959) established that individuals with MR are delayed when compared to their non-
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".