Children with Developmental Co-ordination Disorder: A Qualitative Study of Parents' Descriptions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the study was to analyse parents' descriptions of their observations, feelings and actions concerning developmental co-ordination disorder in their children. Thirty-seven parents were interviewed, all of whom had a child who had failed both in the Child Health Centre motor screening test for children 5-6 years old and in the Movement ABC motor tests. The subjects mentioned by the parents at the interviews could be condensed into five themes: motor behaviours in specific situations, overall impression of behaviours, communicative and physical observations, emotions concerning parenthood, and support in physical activities. Parents of children with definite motor difficulties were particularly supportive of their children in physical activities and reported worry and uncertainty in parenthood. Professionals should explicitly ask parents about comparisons between their children and others regarding development and learning. It may be essential to find out whether parents' concerns have reference to one area or to more, as an indication of the children's difficulties. Parents whose children are unwilling to participate in physical activities may need information and an opportunity to observe training organised to encourage motor learning and development in their children.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".