Statistical analysis of the longitudinal fundamental movement skills data in the <scp>REACT</scp> project using the multilevel ordinal logistic model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The REACT project was designed around two main aims: (1) to assess children's growth and motor development after the COVID-19 pandemic and (2) to follow their fundamental movement skills' developmental trajectories over 18 months using a novel technological device (Meu Educativo®) in their physical education classes. In this article, our goal is to describe statistical analysis of the longitudinal ordinal motor development data that was obtained from these children using the multilevel ordinal logistic model. METHODS: Longitudinal ordinal data are often collected in studies on motor development. For example, children or adolescents might be rated as having poor, good, or excellent performance levels in fundamental movement skills, and such ratings may be obtained yearly over time to assess changes in fundamental movement skills levels of performance. However, such longitudinal ordinal data are often analyzed using either methods for continuous outcomes, or by dichotomizing the ordinal outcome and using methods for binary data. These approaches are not optimal, and so we describe in detail the use of the multilevel ordinal logistic model for analysis of such data from the REACT project. Our intent is to provide an accessible description and application of this model for analysis of ordinal motor development data. DISCUSSION: Our analyses show both the between-subjects and within-subjects effects of age on motor development outcomes across three timepoints. The between-subjects effect of age indicate that children that are older have higher motor development ratings, relative to thoese that are younger, whereas the within-subject effect of age indicates higher motor development ratings as a child ages. It is the latter effect that is particularly of interest in longitudinal studies of motor development, and an important advantage of using the multilevel ordinal logistic model relative to more traditional methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".