Wheelchair Physical Activities and Sports for Children and Adolescents: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Increased understanding of the outcomes associated with physical activity and sports has the potential to guide rehabilitation interventions for children and adolescents with disabilities. Aim: To describe research related to group physical activity and sport participation of children and adolescent wheelchair users. Methods: The five-step framework described by Arksey and O’Malley was used to guide the review. Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and SCOPUS) were searched for relevant literature and selected articles were screened and evaluated for inclusion. Basic article information, study objectives, participant information, methods, outcome measures (quantitative), and themes (qualitative) were extracted from the selected articles. Outcome measures were coded using the domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. Results: Seventeen articles were included in the review. The quantitative research articles evaluated outcomes related to test/training parameters (n = 2), evaluation of tools/models (n = 6), and biomechanical/physiological/participation profiles of athletes/equipment (n = 5). Four qualitative studies explored perceptions and experiences with participation, social supports, and identity development. No articles focused on power wheelchair sport. Conclusion: Additional research on evaluating outcomes associated with group physical activity and sport participation is needed to inform clinical practice and guide future research.
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".