Intersegmental coordination in children with and without DCD in ball catching
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this inquiry was to examine how children with (M = 10.5 years) and without Developmental Coordination Disorder (M = 10.9 years) recruited the relevant degrees of freedom needed for an interceptive task such as ball catching. Ten balls were projected, at the speed of 7m/s, to the dominant side of the participant. Two digital cameras (60 Hz) were used for the purpose of 3D reconstruction, and APAS system was used to extract the angular displacement of the shoulders and trunk. Significant differences were found between the groups in trunk (M nodcd = 31 deg vs. M dcd = 16 deg) ( t (18) = 4.69, p nodcd = 66 deg vs. M dcd = 64 deg). Also, typically developing children exhibited tight coupling between the angular displacement of the two elements, as compared to children with DCD who decoupled the actions of the shoulder and trunk (r nodcd = .84 vs. r dcd = .58) ( t (18) = 4.84, p nodcd = .15 vs. r dcd = .28). From these results we suggest that inter-segmental coordination is jeopardized in children with DCD, and that this may be due to the less than optimal recruitment of degrees of freedom associated with trunk action.%
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".