The Relationship Between Sensory Processing Patterns and Participation in Childhood Leisure and Play Activities: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Sensory processing patterns can be related to children's preferences for various activities. Still, our understanding of how different sensory processing patterns are related to children's participation in leisure activities is fairly limited. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the association between sensory processing patterns and children's participation in leisure activities. Methods: In this systematic review, the PRISMA (The Preferred Reporting Items For Systematic Reviews And Meta-Analyses) Guidelines were followed. We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, Springer, ProQuest, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Medline, OT Seeker, SID, and Healio databases using the following keywords: “Participation”, “leisure”, “play”, “sensory processing”, “sensory integration”, “sensorimotor”, “sensory”, and “children”. A total of 5040 articles were found, of which 5027 were eliminated after the review, and finally, 13 articles were included in the study based on the inclusion criteria; 6 of them entered the meta-analysis process. The meta-analysis was performed using CMA software. Results: The meta-analysis of 6 studies illustrated a significant correlation between the energy level and desire to participate in leisure activities, the auditory-visual sensitivity and willingness to participate in leisure activities, the sensory processing patterns and the intensity of involvement in leisure activities, the general sensory processing and desire to participate in leisure activities, the sensory processing patterns and desire to participate in informal activities, the olfactory sensitivity and desire to participate in leisure activities, the auditory filtering and desire to participate in leisure activities, the sensory processing patterns and enjoyment of participation in leisure activities, and finally sensory processing patterns and desire to participate in recreational activities. Discussion: The evidence in articles on sensory processing patterns and participation in play and leisure activities is inadequate. The only conclusion drawn from all patterns of sensory processing is the significant relationship between these patterns and the preference to participate in recreational activities (which is just one of the several leisure activities).
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".