Impacts of Participation in Community-Based Physical Activity Programs on Cognitive Functions of Children and Youth with Neurodevelopmental Disabilities: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review paper aimed to undertake an extensive exploration of the extent, range, and nature of research activities regarding the effect and emerging evidence in the field of physical activity interventions on cognitive development among children and youth (0-17.99 years) with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD), and to help identify key gaps in research and determine precise research questions for future investigations. To carry out this scoping review, five electronic databases were searched. A total of 12,097 articles were retrieved via search efforts with an additional 93 articles identified from the identified review papers. Sixty articles were eligible for inclusion. The results of this scoping review revealed many positive key cognitive outcomes related to physical activity including, but not limited to: focus, attention, self-control, cognitive process, and alertness. No studies reported a negative association between physical activity and cognitive outcomes. Based on the findings from this scoping review, physical activity appears to have a favorable impact on the cognitive outcomes of children and youth with NDD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".