Symptoms of anxiety and depression in children with developmental coordination disorder: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To find evidence of the symptoms of anxiety/depression in children with developmental coordination disorder as compared to their typically developing peers at both the group and individual level, and to identify how many different tools are used to measure anxiety and/or depression. Electronic searches in eight databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, PsycINFO, Embase, SciELO and LILACS), using the following keywords: ‘Developmental Coordination Disorder,’ ‘Behavioral Problems,’ ‘Child,’ ‘Anxiety,’ ‘Depression,’ ‘Mental Health,’ and ‘Mental Disorders.’ The methodological quality was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa Scale adapted for cross-sectional studies and the NOS for cohort studies. The studies were classified as low, moderate, or high quality. To provide clinical evidence, the effect size of the symptoms of anxiety and depression was calculated for each study. The initial database searches identified 581 studies, and after the eligibility criteria were applied, six studies were included in the review. All studies were classified as being of moderate to high quality, and the effect sizes for both anxiety and depression outcomes were medium. The evidence indicated that all of the assessed studies presented more symptoms of anxiety and depression in children with developmental coordination disorder than in their typically developing peers. On the individual level, this review found children with clinical symptoms of anxiety in 17–34% (developmental coordination disorder) and 0–23% (typically developing), and of depression in 9–15% (developmental coordination disorder) and 2–5% (typically developing) of the children. Children with developmental coordination disorder are at higher risk of developing symptoms of anxiety and depression than their typically developing peers. Encontrar evidências dos sintomas de ansiedade/depressão em crianças com transtorno do desenvolvimento da coordenação em comparação com seus pares com desenvolvimento típico, a nível individual bem como em grupo, e identificar quantas ferramentas diferentes são utilizadas para medir a ansiedade e/ou depressão. Pesquisa eletrônica em oito bases de dados (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Eric, PsycINFO, Embase, Scielo e Lilacs), utilizando as seguintes palavras-chave: ‘Developmental Coordination Disorder’, ‘Behavioral Problems’, ‘Child’, ‘Anxiety’, ‘Depression’, ‘Mental Health’ e ‘Mental Disorders’. A qualidade metodológica foi avaliada pela escala de Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) adaptada para estudos transversais e pela escala de Newcastle-Ottawa (NOS) para estudos de coorte. Os estudos foram classificados em: qualidade baixa, moderada e alta. Para fornecer evidência clínica, o tamanho do efeito dos sintomas de ansiedade e depressão foi calculado para cada estudo. As buscas iniciais nas bases de dados identificaram 581 estudos e, após a aplicação dos critérios de elegibilidade, seis estudos foram incluídos na revisão. Todos os estudos foram classificados como tendo qualidade moderada a alta e os tamanhos do efeito para os desfechos de ansiedade e depressão foram médios. As evidências indicaram que 100% dos estudos avaliados apresentaram mais sintomas de ansiedade e depressão em crianças com transtorno do desenvolvimento da coordenação do que em seus pares com desenvolvimento típico. No nível individual, encontramos crianças com sintomas clínicos de ansiedade em 17-34% (transtorno do desenvolvimento da coordenação) e 0-23% (desenvolvimento típico) e de depressão em 9-15% (transtorno do desenvolvimento da coordenação) e 2-5% (desenvolvimento típico) das crianças. Crianças com transtorno do desenvolvimento da coordenação apresentam maior risco de desenvolver sintomas de ansiedade e depressão do que seus pares com desenvolvimento típico.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".