Examining the relationships between motor coordination, self-regulation, and endurance exercise performance in preschool-aged children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) have reduced fitness, executive functioning (EF), and self-regulation compared to typically developing (TD) children; however, the impact this has on endurance performance has yet to be examined. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of self-regulation and EF on endurance performance in children with motor coordination difficulties. Self-regulation and EF were assessed using the internalizing and externalizing subscales of the Child Behaviour Checklist completed by the person most knowledgeable of the child. Motor coordination was assessed using the Movement Assessment Battery for Children, Second Edition (MABC-2). Endurance performance was assessed by a maximal treadmill test using the Bruce protocol. ANOVAs were used to compare differences between children at risk for DCD (rDCD; scoring at or below the 16th percentile on the MABC-2) and TD children, while controlling for age and sex. Mediation analyses were performed while also controlling for age and sex. Of the total sample (n=559, Mage=4.9 ± 0.6 years), 270 (n=178 boys) children were classified as rDCD. Children with rDCD were found to have lower endurance performance (p
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".