Assessments Used to Diagnose Developmental Coordination Disorder: Do Their Underlying Constructs Match the Diagnostic Criteria?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the constructs underlying the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (M-ABC-2), Bruninks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (BOTMP) and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale-2 (VABS-2) using the framework of the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health-Child Youth version (ICF-CY) and the diagnostic criteria of developmental coordination disorder (DCD). Two independent raters coded and matched items to ICF-CY codes as per the eight ICF linking rules developed by Cierza and colleagues. Content density and inter-rater reliability were also calculated. The majority of codes assigned to the M-ABC-2 and BOTMP related to body functions (54% and 64% respectively). For the VABS-2, 91% of codes pertained to activities and participation. The M-ABC-2, BOTMP, and the VABS-2 emphasize the ICF-CY constructs differently. The VABS-2 may be useful in the evaluation of performance of daily life activities and participation in children with DCD.
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 | 0.016 | 0.118 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".