Test-Retest Reliability of the Motor-Free Visual Perception Test Revised (MVPT-R) in Children with and Without Learning Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Motor-Free Visual Perceptual Test Revised (MVPT-R) is an updated edition of the original test with the addition of four items and normative data for 9-11-year-old children. Test-retest reliability studies on the MVPT-R are not reported. The purpose of this paper is to report the test-retest reliability of the MVPT-R in children with and without learning disabilities. The MVPT-R was administered to 38 children with identified learning disabilities and 37 control children (aged 7-10 years) on two separate occasions within a 2.5 week window of time. Inter-rater reliability agreement between examiners was 99%. Intra-class correlations for perceptual quotient scores ranged from .63-.79 and perceptual age scores ranged from .69-.86. Pearson product moment correlations for perceptual quotient scores ranged from .70-.80 and perceptual age scores ranged from .77-.87. Results suggest moderate test-retest reliability for the MVPT-R with more stability in visual perceptual scores for children with learning disabilities. This information will be helpful for therapists using the MVPT-R as a descriptive measure for children.
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 | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".