MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943802470 · doi:10.1093/ptj/pzz012

Do Exercise Interventions Improve Balance for Children and Adolescents With Down Syndrome? A Systematic Review

2019· review· en· W2943802470 on OpenAlexafffund
Christophe Maïano, Olivier Hüe, Geneviève Lepage, Alexandre J. S. Morin, Danielle Tracey, Grégory Moullec

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Therapy · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDown syndrome and intellectual disability research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à MontréalConcordia UniversityCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersAustralian Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCINAHLPsychological interventionBalance (ability)MEDLINEDynamic balanceRandomized controlled trialScopusPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationData extractionMedicinePsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Youths with Down syndrome are characterized by deficits in balance/postural stability. One way to palliate balance deficits among this population is through exercise interventions. However, to the authors' knowledge, the effects of exercise interventions designed to improve the balance of youths with Down syndrome have never been systematically reviewed. PURPOSE: The purpose of this review was to summarize the findings from studies examining the effects of exercise interventions designed to improve balance in youths with Down syndrome. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search was performed in 10 databases (Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus With Full-Text, Education Source, ERIC, Medline With Full-Text, PsycARTICLES, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, Scopus, SocINDEX, and SPORTDiscus With Full-Text) on June 12, 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials and controlled trials examining the effects of exercise interventions designed to improve balance in youths with Down syndrome were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors selected the studies and extracted their characteristics and results. Three authors assessed the risk of bias in the studies using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eleven studies, published between 2010 and 2017, met the inclusion criteria. The findings showed that exercise interventions were more effective than control conditions for improving the static balance of children with Down syndrome and the static-dynamic balance (ie, global balance score obtained with a scale measuring both static and dynamic balance) of children and adolescents with Down syndrome. Nevertheless, the findings on dynamic balance in children and static balance in adolescents were inconclusive. LIMITATIONS: With a small number of studies and their high risk of bias, the present findings must be interpreted with caution. CONCLUSIONS: The reviewed exercise interventions were successful in improving the static balance of children with Down syndrome and the static-dynamic balance of children and adolescents with Down syndrome.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations46
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical TherapySame topicDown syndrome and intellectual disability researchFrench-language works237,207