Cross-sectional study of motor development among children after the Fontan procedure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the gross motor skills of school-aged children after the Fontan procedure and compare the locomotor and object control skills with normative data. Study design This study followed a cross-sectional design. SETTING: This study was based on hospital outpatient visit, with accelerometry conducted at home. Patients This study included 55 patients, including 22 girls in the age group of 6-10 years, 5.1 years after Fontan. Main outcome measures Test of Gross Motor Development - Version 2, daily activity by accelerometer, medical history review, child and parent perceptions of activity. RESULTS: Being involved in active team sports increased locomotor percentile score by 10.3 points (CI: 4.4, 16.1). Preference for weekend outdoor activities (6.9, CI: 2.0, 11.8), performing at least 30 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity daily (24.5, CI: 7.3, 41.8), and reporting that parents seldom criticise the child's physical activity (21.8, CI: 8.9, 34.8) were also associated with higher locomotor percentile scores (p < 0.01). Object control percentile scores were higher (p < 0.03) with involvement in formal instruction (5.9, CI: 1.1, 10.6) and being restricted to "activities within comfortable limits" (27.6, CI: 7.7, 47.5). Older chronological age (r = 0.28), a more complicated medical history (r = 0.36), and older age at Fontan (r = 0.28) were associated with greater skill delay (p < 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Children after Fontan attain basic motor skills at a later age than their peers, and deficits continue for more complex skills as age increases, suggesting a need for longitudinal monitoring of gross motor skill development through the elementary school years. Future research might investigate whether a gross motor skill rehabilitation programme can provide these children with the motor skills needed to successfully participate in a physically active lifestyle with peers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".