Effects of sedentary behaviour on internalizing problems in children with and without motor coordination problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with motor coordination problems are at increased risk of both sedentary behaviour and internalizing problems relative to their typically developing (TD) peers. The purpose of this study was to examine the moderating role of sedentary behaviour on the relationship between motor skill proficiency and anxiety/depression scores in children at risk for Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCDr) and a sample of typically developing (TD) children. Data for the present study were derived from the Coordination and Activity Tracking in CHildren (CATCH) cohort study. 507 children aged 4-5 years (219 girls, 288 boys, mean age: 59.3 months) were classified as TD (>16th percentile), or DCDr (?16th percentile) based on Movement Assessment Battery for Children 2nd edition scores. Sedentary and physical activity behaviour was measured using an Actigraph GT3X+ activity monitor device. Parent-reported Child Behaviour Checklist (CBCL) scores were used to assess internalizing problems (i.e. anxiety/depression). Multiple linear regression (moderation) analysis showed sedentary behaviour significantly moderated the relationship between motor skill proficiency and anxiety/depression scores after adjusting for sex and physical activity behaviour, R2 change = .01, F (1,501) = 4.13, p = .043. Johnson-Neyman technique revealed DCDr children begin to report significantly higher anxiety/depression scores when their sedentary behaviour is at least one minute per day above the group mean (M = 452 mins/day). Above average levels of sedentary behaviour exacerbate internalized problems among DCDr children. Interventions should focus on incorporating strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour in order to buffer anxiety/depressive symptoms for children with poor motor skill proficiency.Acknowledgments: CIHR
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) | 0.001 | 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".