Effects of group-based physical activity programs on children, adolescents, and young adults with disabilities: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In recent years, a concerning decline in the physical activity levels of young individuals has been observed, with a notable impact on those with disabilities. Despite evidence suggesting that physical activity programs yield health benefits for youths with disabilities, there exists a significant gap in understanding the specific group-based effects, strategies for effectiveness, sustainability, program development, adaptation details, and empirical value. METHOD: This systematic review examines quasi-experimental and experimental design research published from 2013 to 2025 on group-based physical activity programs for children, adolescents, and young adults (5-24 years old) with disabilities according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: The searches yielded 2 715 studies, of which 20 were included. This review highlights multiple disabilities, diverse program durations and activities, and favorable results spanning physical, social, emotional, and cognitive dimensions. The main findings indicated strategies for program effectiveness portrayed as adaptation details. Despite every study providing positive outcomes, limitation concerning confounding variables, sample size and disparity, generalizability, sustainability, and fidelity of implementation remain. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the selected studies suggest great holistic outcomes for youth with disabilities and are to be implemented in addition to special schools or treatment. Future research should explore differences among less common disabilities, emphasizing cognitive outcomes, trainer impact, and program inclusivity to develop accessibility and effective interventions for youth with disabilities.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".