Physical Fitness Level and the Selected Testing in Individuals with Intellectual Disability (ID): A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with Intellectual disabilities (ID) demonstrate a lower level of cardiovascular fitness than their normal counterparts, which starts at an early age and deteriorates with age. A poor level of physical fitness among individuals with ID, suggesting the need to improve their cardiovascular endurance, body composition, muscular endurance, strength, and motor coordination. This review aimed to elucidate findings on selected fitness testing used among individuals with ID and their physical fitness status. Literature was searched systematically based on PRISMA guidelines, using Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases. Twelve studies were included in the final analysis. There were randomised-controlled studies that investigated the measurement for fitness battery used among children, youth and athletes with ID. There are six main fitness batteries were reported to be used among ID people. Five studies reported to use Eurofit special battery, 3 studies using SAMU Dis fit, 1 study using Brockport, 1 study using Fullerton battery, while another 1 study using combination of Eurofit with Canadian Standard test and 1 study using others physical performance battery. Most of the batteries potentially to assess health and skill related fitness for special group population. The physical fitness tests also may be differ due to the differences in age factors, as a result from differ in capabilities and requirements in their daily functioning. Considering the health conditions of individual with ID, it is important to design and develop the fitness battery accordingly to provide appropriate recommendation to improve their overall wellbeing and health.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".