MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187080632 · doi:10.1123/jmpb.2020-0065

Association of Individual Motor Abilities and Accelerometer-Derived Physical Activity Measures in Preschool-Aged Children

2021· article· en· W3187080632 on OpenAlexaff
Becky Breau, Berit Brandes, Marvin N. Wright, Christoph Buck, Lori Ann Vallis, Mirko Brandes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Measurement of Physical Behaviour · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfidence intervalPhysical activityDemographyMotor skillLinear regressionJumpingMedicinePsychologyPhysical therapyDevelopmental psychologyMathematicsStatisticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the relationship between motor abilities and accelerometer-derived measures of physical activity (PA) within preschool-aged children. A total of 193 children (101 girls, 4.2 ± 0.7 years) completed five tests to assess motor abilities, shuttle run (SR), standing long jump, lateral jumping, one-leg stand, and sit and reach. Four PA variables derived from 7-day wrist-worn GENEActiv accelerometers were analyzed including moderate to vigorous PA (in minutes), total PA (in minutes), percentage of total PA time in moderate to vigorous PA, and whether or not children met World Health Organization guidelines for PA. Linear regressions were conducted to explore associations between each PA variable (predictor) and motor ability (outcome). Models were adjusted for age, sex, height, parental education, time spent at sports clubs, and wear time. Models with percentage of total PA time in moderate to vigorous PA were adjusted for percentage of total PA time. Regression analyses indicated that no PA variables were associated with any of the motor abilities, but demographic factors such as age (e.g., SR: ß = −0.45; 95% confidence interval [−1.64, −0.66]), parental education (e.g., SR: ß = 0.25; 95% confidence interval [0.11, 1.87]), or sports club time (e.g., SR: ß = −0.08; 95% confidence interval [−0.98, 0.26]) showed substantial associations with motor abilities. Model strength varied depending on the PA variable and motor ability entered. Results demonstrate that total PA and meeting current PA guidelines may be of importance for motor ability development and should be investigated further. Other covariates showed stronger associations with motor abilities such as time spent at sports clubs and should be investigated in longitudinal settings to assess the associations with individual motor abilities.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.560
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Measurement of Physical BehaviourSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207