MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164905746 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0252043

Attentional and executive functions in children and adolescents with developmental coordination disorder and the influence of comorbid disorders: A systematic review of the literature

2021· review· en· W3164905746 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Lachambre, Mélodie Proteau-Lemieux, Jean‐François Lepage, Ève-Line Bussières, Sarah Lippé

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExecutive functionsWorking memoryPsychologyVerbal fluency testPsycINFOCognitionAttentional controlNonverbal communicationPopulationClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyMEDLINEMedicinePsychiatryNeuropsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder affecting primarily motor skills, but attentional and executive impairments are common in affected individuals. Moreover, the presence of neurodevelopmental comorbidities is frequent in this population, which certainly influences the cognitive profile of the children concerned. Previous studies have reported deficits in visuospatial/nonverbal and planning tasks. This systematic review of the literature aims to determine if impairments can be found in other attentional and executive functions as well. The type of cognitive tasks, the tasks' modality (verbal/nonverbal), and the influence of comorbid disorders on attentional and executive profiles are systematically considered. Forty-one studies were identified through the PubMed/Medline and PsycINFO databases according to pre-established eligibility criteria. The results reveal weaknesses in inhibitory control, working memory, planning, nonverbal fluency, and general executive functioning in children with DCD. The presence of comorbid disorders seemingly contributes to the verbal working memory difficulties findings. This review contributes to a better understanding of the cognitive impairments in DCD and of the needs of children with this disorder, allowing to optimize practitioners' therapeutic interventions.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations42
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207