Can children at risk for developmental coordination disorder step-clap to the beat? Evidence from an online motion tracking study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder involving deficits in motor coordination. Recent evidence has shown children at risk for DCD have associated auditory timing perception and auditory-motor synchronization deficits, but it remains unclear how these deficits would appear in full-body coordination tasks, particularly as DCD is often associated with gross motor impairments such as balance and gait. Current interventions for DCD focus on motor training alone, although preliminary findings suggest that motor interventions with rhythmic auditory cueing may confer additional benefit. To investigate auditory-motor synchronization during full-body coordination, we tested whether children aged 9-12 at risk for DCD could synchronize a step-clap dance step to various auditory stimuli using online data collection. Frequency analysis of the tracked head, hands, and feet showed that children at risk for DCD perform the dance step overall slower compared to typically developing children. Cross-correlations of the movements to an interpolated harmonic wave representing the auditory beats showed the group at risk for DCD were less coordinated to the auditory beat compared to typically developing children at the fast tempi, but that both groups performed similarly at slower tempi. Additionally, both groups were more coordinated and less variable at slower compared to faster tempi. These results indicating better performance in children at risk for DCD at slower auditory tempi are important for informing decisions on auditory stimuli during the design of auditory-motor interventions for DCD.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".