The Effect of a Fundamental Movement Skill Intervention on the Physical Literacy Levels of Children with Congenital Heart Disease – A CHAMPS* Cohort Study: Physical Literacy in Pediatric Congenital Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preliminary evidence suggests that children with congenital heart disease (CHD) may have low physical literacy (PL). High PL is a determinant of physical activity participation. Therefore, we assessed the effect of a 12-week intervention on the PL of children with CHD. PL was assessed pre- and post-intervention in 14 participants with CHD, aged 9-16 years, using the PLAY tools. The intervention involved six bi-weekly sessions that consisted of a fundamental movement skill practice designed to enhance gross motor function and confidence. PLAYfun assessed physical competence. PLAYself assessed the child’s perception of their PL. PLAYparent was completed by parents to assess their perception of their child’s PL. We found a significant increase in overall physical competence (PLAYfun, p<.001), along with the domains of running (p=.001), locomotor (p=.002), upper body object control (p<.001), and balance (p=.006). No significant changes were found in PLAYself or PLAYparent indicating no changes to their self and parental perceived PL. We demonstrated that a 12-week fundamental movement skill intervention can improve PL in children with CHD. Children with CHD are at an increased risk of sequelae secondary to their reported physical inactivity, PL development may augment physical activity engagement and provide health benefits to this at-risk population.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".