Kara K Palmer, Alec McKheen, Stephanie A Palmer, Aaron P Wood, David F Stodden, Leah E Robinson
{"title":"Using 2 Versions of the Test of Gross Motor Development to Classify and Screen Young Children's Motor Skills: A Comparison Study.","authors":"Kara K Palmer, Alec McKheen, Stephanie A Palmer, Aaron P Wood, David F Stodden, Leah E Robinson","doi":"10.1123/pes.2023-0189","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to examine comparability between 2 editions of the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD-second and TGMD-third edition) on (1) how children's motor skills were categorized as average or below average, and (2) how children are screened for being at-risk for motor delay or with delayed motor skills.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants were 226 children (Mage = 53.4 mo, 125 boys). All children completed full TGMD-2 and TGMD-3. Children were classified as average or above (>25th percentile) or below average (≤25th percentile) and, when applicable, as developmental delay (≤5th percentile) or at-risk for developmental delay (6-25th percentile). We compared children's classifications across TGMD editions using percent agreement and chi-squared tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The TGMD-2 and TGMD-3 had moderate agreement when categorizing children as below average (72.2% for total skills, 76.0% for locomotor skills, and 73% for ball skills). The TGMD-3 was significantly more likely to categorize children's motor skill performance as average or above (all P < .01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>TGMD-2 and TGMD-3 similarly screen children who demonstrate below average skills (≤25th percentile), but not for specific skill level classifications, including above average, at-risk for delays, and delayed.</p>","PeriodicalId":49712,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Exercise Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Exercise Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/pes.2023-0189","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine comparability between 2 editions of the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD-second and TGMD-third edition) on (1) how children's motor skills were categorized as average or below average, and (2) how children are screened for being at-risk for motor delay or with delayed motor skills.
Methods: Participants were 226 children (Mage = 53.4 mo, 125 boys). All children completed full TGMD-2 and TGMD-3. Children were classified as average or above (>25th percentile) or below average (≤25th percentile) and, when applicable, as developmental delay (≤5th percentile) or at-risk for developmental delay (6-25th percentile). We compared children's classifications across TGMD editions using percent agreement and chi-squared tests.
Results: The TGMD-2 and TGMD-3 had moderate agreement when categorizing children as below average (72.2% for total skills, 76.0% for locomotor skills, and 73% for ball skills). The TGMD-3 was significantly more likely to categorize children's motor skill performance as average or above (all P < .01).
Conclusion: TGMD-2 and TGMD-3 similarly screen children who demonstrate below average skills (≤25th percentile), but not for specific skill level classifications, including above average, at-risk for delays, and delayed.
期刊介绍：
Pediatric Exercise Science is a journal committed to enriching the scientific knowledge of exercise during childhood and adolescence. To this end it publishes information that contributes to an understanding of (a) the unique aspects of the physiologic, physical, biochemical, and psychologic responses of children to exercise, (b) the role of exercise in the treatment of pediatric chronic diseases, (c) the importance of physical activity in the prevention of illness and preservation of wellness, and (d) the means by which participation in sports may be made safer and more enjoyable for children and youth. Consideration will be given for publication of work by various methodologies consistent with the scientific approach.
Besides original research, the journal includes review articles, abstracts from other journals, book reviews, and editorial comments. Pediatric Exercise Science encourages the expression of conflicting opinions regarding children and exercise by providing a forum for alternative viewpoints. At the same time it serves as a means of accumulating a base of research information that will allow application of experimental data to clinical practice. The scientific disciplines contributing to this body of knowledge are diverse. Therefore it is the purpose of this journal to provide a common focus for disseminating advances in the science of exercise during childhood. In doing so, the journal allows the opportunity for cross-fertilization of ideas between disciplines that will potentiate the growth of knowledge in this field. Pediatric Exercise Science seeks to stimulate new ideas regarding exercise in children and to increase the awareness of scientists, health care providers, and physical educators of the importance of exercise during childhood.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
