Paediatric motor difficulties and internalising problems: an integrative review on the environmental stress hypothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study aims to provide an in-depth analysis and extension of the Environmental Stress Hypothesis (ESH) framework, focusing on the complex interplay between poor motor skills and internalising problems like anxiety and depression. Using an integrative research review methodology, this study synthesises findings from 38 articles, both empirical and theoretical, building upon previous foundational works. The hypothesis posits that poor motor skills serve as a primary stressor, leading to internalising problems through various secondary stressors. A rigorous comparison of data was conducted, considering study design, findings, and methodologies-while exploring variables such as age, sex, and comorbidities. The study also enhances the ESH framework by including intrapersonal stressors and introducing resource buffers, including optimism and familial support as additional influencing factors. This multi-level approach yields a more nuanced and comprehensive ESH framework, highlighting the need for future studies to consider variables that intersect across multiple domains and how the relationship between poor motor skills and internalising problems may vary across different life stages.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".