Effects of brain-breaks exercise video program on fundamental motor skills performance among the \nprimary school students in Kapit, Sarawak
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proficiency in Fundamental Motor Skills (FMS) among children is important \nfor children to engage in physical activity (PA) and live an active lifestyle which will \nbring positive implications to their physical, cognitive, and social development. \nHowever, there is evidence that indicates low proficiency in FMS among children. The \nstudy involved two interrelated studies and was divided into 2 phases: (1) Crosssectional \nstudy (2) Interventional study. Data for both study phases were collected \nusing the Canadian Agility and Movement Skill Assessment (CAMSA) instrument. \nPhase 1 of the study aimed to identify the Sarawakian children’s FMS test scores based \non gender and to identify the percentiles of total FMS score among Sarawakian \nchildren based on gender and age. Data were analysed using the descriptive statistics \n(mean, standard deviation, percentiles, crosstabs). 385 students were randomly \nselected from 4 invited primary schools from 3 divisions in Sarawak (Kuching, Kota \nSamarahan, Kapit). Males scored higher than females in all variables; completion time \n(males, 28.65 ± 6.29; females, 28.09 ± 5.15), time score (males, 3.04 ± 2.20; females, \n2.93 ± 1.82), skill score (males, 8.39 ± 2.51; females, 7.84 ± 2.62), total CAMSA score \n(males, 11.42 ± 3.91; females, 10.77 ± 3.62), and interpretation (males, 1.09 ± .30; \nfemales, 1.06 ± .23). In addition, the the Sarawakian children’s total FMS score \npercentiles were lower as compared to the Canadian children. Phase 2 aimed to \nexamine the effects of Brain-Breaks exercise video program in FMS performance \namong the primary school students in Kapit, Sarawak. 104 students from 2 invited primary schools in Kapit, Sarawak participated in the study. Following the pre-test, \nthe schools were randomly assigned to an intervention group (n = 53) and a control \ngroup (n = 51). The intervention group received two-30 minutes Brain-Breaks sessions \nper week for 7 weeks and the control group continued with their regular Physical \nEducation (PE) class for 7 weeks. A post-test was conducted following the 7-week \nintervention. Mixed factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to examine the \neffects of Brain-Breaks on the study variables. A mixed ANOVA showed significant \nchanges (time effect) on skill score, F(1,102) = 73.85, p-value = < .001; total CAMSA \nscore, F(1, 102) = 52.94, p-value = < .001; and interpretation, F(1, 102) = 15.57, pvalue \n= < .001. There were also significant differences between groups on skill score, \nF(1, 102) = 35.21, p-value = < .001; and total CAMSA score, F(1, 102) = 5.81, pvalue \n= .018. A significant interaction effect was found for skill score, F(1, 102) = \n17.07, p-value = < .001. In conclusion, the skill score and total CAMSA score among \nprimary school students significantly improved following the Brain-Breaks \nintervention. Behavioural change intervention programs and strategies are essential in \nthe acquiring of fundamental motor skills among the primary school students which \nare central to sports participation and 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".