MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Agility of Adolescents with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Compared with Normal Controls

2018· article· en· W2807355009 on OpenAlexaff
Laurie Simard, Tommy Chevrette, Julie Bouchard, Linda Pacquette, Jacinthe Dion, Claudia Verret, Alain Steve Comtois, Jacques R. Leroux

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsHôpital Rivière-des-PrairiesUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderAudiologyPercentilePsychologyAnalysis of varianceStatistical significanceGross motor skillMotor skillMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPhysical therapyClinical psychologyInternal medicineMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Motor delay (MD) has been shown in children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), such as agility. Agility is involved in everyday movements and is essential to the development of sports skills. Recent imaging studies have shown delayed of the cerebral cortex development of near three years in children with ADHD, which could explain MD. This study aims to evaluate Agility in ADHD male adolescents compare to normal controls, group-matched for age. Moreover, if MD in agility is still observable in ADHD, to determine which group age they can be compared with. METHODS: This study included 40 adolescents; 20 with ADHD (ADHD-gr; age 13.8 ± 0.9 yr) and 20 normal controls (Control-gr; age 13.5 ± 1.0 yr). First, both groups were compared using the UQAC-UQAM Gross motor tests battery for agility: Shuttle, Circle, Side-stepping, and Slalom run. Agility scores (sec.) were compared between groups using One-way ANOVA. Then, descriptive comparisons were performed using results of the 50th percentile in 8 yr children (P50-8) and in 12 yr (P50-12) for each agility tests. RESULTS: Adolescents with ADHD were significantly slower when compared to control in Shuttle Run (11.2 ± 1.3 vs. 6.6 ± 3.1 sec., p<0.001) and Circle Run (22.3 ± 2.9 vs. 19.5 ± 2.2 sec., p<0.001). Results tending to be slower for Side-stepping, and Slalom Run but did not reach significance. When compared to norms across age group, ADHD-gr scores (sec.) were aligned to P50-8 and slower then P50-12 for all agility tests. However, as expected, the scores (sec.) of Control-gr, were aligned or better to P50-12. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, motor delay in agility is still observable in a group of adolescents with ADHD. It seems to have a delay of about 5 years between groups (ADHD vs Control) for all tests measuring agility. Further research is needed to clarify motor delay in adolescents with ADHD for all determinants of gross motor skills (agility, coordination, segmental velocity, balance, and reaction time).Table: No title available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder→French-language works237,207→