Physical activity experiences among children with ADHD and ASD: a qualitative meta-synthesis literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim was to analyze and synthesize empirical research on physical activity experiences among children diagnosed with ADHD and ASD. METHODS: A qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted, including 17 articles published between 2010 and 2023. The synthesis encompasses qualitative research on the experiences of children with ADHD and ASD in organized physical activity. Data were categorized into overarching themes based on a socio-ecological model. Each overarching theme was subdivided into themes and sub-themes illustrated with extracts from each study. RESULTS: The research was conducted in several countries, with a predominance of studies from the USA and Canada. Most studies focused on children diagnosed with ASD, with boys being more frequently represented. Various intrapersonal factors were influential, with negative factors including disability-specific constraints, motor skill difficulties, and dissatisfaction with physical activity, while enjoyment of specific activities and positive attitudes towards physical activity were identified as some of the positive factors. In terms of interpersonal factors, interactions with family, friends, teammates, and coaches or teachers shaped both positive and negative experiences. CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide valuable insights into the experiences of children with ADHD and ASD in organized physical activity contexts. Key aspects identified can guide future research and initiatives aimed at including children with ADHD and ASD in organized physical activities.
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 | 0.021 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".