Understanding the physical literacy development of 8‐ to 12‐year‐old children living with chronic medical conditions: A comprehensive, mixed methods inquiry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical literacy is a concept used to describe the combined physical, affective and cognitive capacities facilitating an active lifestyle. Physical activity participation is essential for children living with chronic medical conditions, but knowledge of physical literacy among this group is scarce. METHODS: An explanatory, sequential mixed methods design was used to comprehensively describe the physical literacies of children with chronic medical conditions (CMCs). Participants were recruited from paediatric cardiology, respirology/cystic fibrosis, neurology, haematology and endocrinology outpatient clinics. All participants completed the Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy (2nd Edition), and those with higher and lower scores were invited to a semi-structured interview. A deductive-inductive thematic analysis was applied using Margaret Whitehead's conceptualization of physical literacy. RESULTS: Using normative strata, 80.0% of the 99 children assessed (mean age = 9.97 ± 1.3 years, 48% girls) were considered beginning or progressing in their overall physical literacy (mean score = 56.5 ± 13.8/100). Meanwhile, physical literacy informed participants' approach to new, active experiences and may have contributed to a strong sense of self. There was a significant difference between endocrinology and haematology patients on total physical literacy score (p = 0.03) but not domain scores. Participants scored high on motivation/confidence (mean = 22.9 ± 5.0/30) but obtained low physical competence (mean = 11.8 ± 5.6/30) and daily behaviour scores (n = 72, mean = 15.5 ± 7.1/30). Main themes represent salient experiences of children with CMCs within the domains of physical literacy, including their need to evaluate active contexts, self-regulate activity intensity and manage physical limitations. CONCLUSIONS: Children with CMCs can achieve recommended levels of physical literacy without meeting normative standards for physical competence. Participants would benefit from a physical literacy intervention that targets the development of bodily self-regulation skills and risk evaluation in active settings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".