The Relationship between Fundamental Motor Skill Proficiency and Participation in Organized Sports and Active Recreation in Middle Childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motor skill proficiency in middle childhood is associated with higher physical activity levels at that age and is predictive of adolescent physical activity levels. Much of the previous research in this area has used accelerometry in determining these relationships, and as a result, little is known about what physical activities the children are engaging in. Therefore the aim of this study was to examine rates of participation in physical activities, the relationships between motor proficiency and how often children participate, and if there were gender-based differences in participation, motor skills, or the relationship between these variables. Participants were 400 boys and girls (Mean age = 9 years 6 months) in grade 4. Motor skills were assessed using the Test of Gross Motor Development-2 (TGMD-2) and physical activity participation was measured using the Children's Assessment of Participation and Enjoyment (CAPE). Descriptive statistics, chi-squared analyses, and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) were used to examine activity patterns and whether these patterns differed by gender. Correlation coefficients were used to estimate the relationships between fundamental motor skill proficiency and participation. The boys and girls participated in many of the same activities, but girls were more likely to participate in most of the informal physical activities. More boys than girls participated in team sports, boys participated more frequently in team sports, and the boys' object control and locomotor skill proficiency were significantly associated with participation in team sports. There were some significant associations between motor skills and participation in specific activities; however it is not clear if participation is developing skillfulness or those who are more skilled are engaging and persisting with particular activities.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".