MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409415562 · doi:10.1186/s12889-025-22398-9

Can active play replace skill-oriented physical education in enhancing fundamental movement skills among preschool children? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4409415562 on OpenAlexaff
Bei Liu, Yiping Yan, Jingjing Jia, Yang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Public Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChildren's Physical and Motor Development
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNanchang UniversityShanghai University of Sport
KeywordsBiostatisticsMedicineMovement (music)Meta-analysisPhysical educationPublic healthMotor skillSystematic reviewMedical educationMEDLINENursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Active play emphasizes the enjoyment of physical activity, it is affordable and unconstrained. In contrast, skill-oriented physical education, a mainstream physical activity intervention, is more formalized. However, the comparative effects of these interventions on fundamental movement skills in preschool children remain a subject of debate. PURPOSE: Determine the effectiveness of active play and compare it with skill-oriented physical education on fundamental movement skills. METHODS: We searched four databases (MEDLINE, ERIC, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus) from January 2004 to March 2024. Included studies assessed FMS in children aged 2-6 years, with active play interventions lasting ≥ 4 weeks. The effects of active play and skill-oriented physical education on total fundamental movement skills, locomotor skills, object control, and balance were calculated within random effects models (weighted SMD) in meta-analysis. RESULTS: This systematic review included 23 studies involving 2201 preschool children, with 15 eligible for meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed no significant differences in the effects of active play compared to skill-oriented physical education on total FMS, locomotor skills, object control, balance (p > 0.05). Subgroup analyses indicated that skill-oriented physical education marginally outperformed unstructured active play in total fundamental movement skills and locomotor skills (SMD=-1.0172, 95% CI -1.6748~ -0.3595, p = 0.0073; SMD=-1.6956, 95% CI -3.3511~ -0.0401, p = 0.0471). CONCLUSIONS: Both structured active play and skill-oriented physical education are comparable effective in improving fundamental movement skills. However, unstructured active play is less effective. In resource-limited educational settings, structured active play may serve as a viable complement to partial skill-oriented physical education programming.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.030
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Public HealthSame topicChildren's Physical and Motor DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207