Comprehensive Assessment and Early Prediction of Gross Motor Performance in Toddlers With Graph Convolutional Networks–Based Deep Learning: Development and Validation Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate and timely assessment of children's developmental status is crucial for early diagnosis and intervention. More accurate and automated developmental assessments are essential due to the lack of trained health care providers and imprecise parental reporting. In various areas of development, gross motor development in toddlers is known to be predictive of subsequent childhood developments. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a model to assess gross motor behavior and integrate the results to determine the overall gross motor status of toddlers. This study also aimed to identify behaviors that are important in the assessment of overall gross motor skills and detect critical moments and important body parts for the assessment of each behavior. METHODS: We used behavioral videos of toddlers aged 18-35 months. To assess gross motor development, we selected 4 behaviors (climb up the stairs, go down the stairs, throw the ball, and stand on 1 foot) that have been validated with the Korean Developmental Screening Test for Infants and Children. In the child behavior videos, we estimated each child's position as a bounding box and extracted human keypoints within the box. In the first stage, the videos with the extracted human keypoints of each behavior were evaluated separately using a graph convolutional networks (GCN)-based algorithm. The probability values obtained for each label in the first-stage model were used as input for the second-stage model, the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithm, to predict the overall gross motor status. For interpretability, we used gradient-weighted class activation mapping (Grad-CAM) to identify important moments and relevant body parts during the movements. The Shapley additive explanations method was used for the assessment of variable importance, to determine the movements that contributed the most to the overall developmental assessment. RESULTS: Behavioral videos of 4 gross motor skills were collected from 147 children, resulting in a total of 2395 videos. The stage-1 GCN model to evaluate each behavior had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.79 to 0.90. Keypoint-mapping Grad-CAM visualization identified important moments in each behavior and differences in important body parts. The stage-2 XGBoost model to assess the overall gross motor status had an AUROC of 0.90. Among the 4 behaviors, "go down the stairs" contributed the most to the overall developmental assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Using movement videos of toddlers aged 18-35 months, we developed objective and automated models to evaluate each behavior and assess each child's overall gross motor performance. We identified the important behaviors for assessing gross motor performance and developed methods to recognize important moments and body parts while evaluating gross motor performance.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".