SynthesisPloS one2020
The validity and reliability of observational assessment tools available to measure fundamental movement skills in school-age children: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
35 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 100 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of school-based interventions on fundamental movement skills in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- The effects of active play interventions on children's fundamental movement skills: a systematic review.BMC pediatrics · 2025Pooled it
- Assessment of the measurement properties of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2 by applying the COSMIN methodology.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- A systematic review of tools designed for teacher proxy-report of children's physical literacy or constituting elements.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2021Pooled it
- Assessments Related to the Physical, Affective and Cognitive Domains of Physical Literacy Amongst Children Aged 7-11.9 Years: A Systematic Review.Sports medicine - open · 2021Pooled it
- Computing and Evaluating Relationships Between Equal and Differential Factor Weighting for Fundamental Movement Skills and Physical Activity with Guided Active Play During Childhood.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Fundamental Movement/Motor Skills as an Important Component of Physical Literacy and Bridge to Physical Activity: A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Promoting Fundamental Movement Skills and Physical Literacy Among 8-12-Year-Old Children: Feasibility Insights from an 8-Week Pilot Program in Southwestern Ontario.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of three process-oriented assessment tools for identifying fundamental motor skills proficiency in children.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Sex Differences in Gross Motor Competence in Italian Children Aged 3-11 Years: A Large-Scale Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Assessing the Measurement Properties of the Test of Gross Motor Development-3 Using the COSMIN Methodology-A Systematic Review.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Preliminary validity evidence for a rapid fundamental movement skill assessment tool for primary education settings.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Article
- Prevalence of fundamental movement skill mastery in school-aged children and adolescents: a systematic review.BMJ open sport & exercise medicine · 2025Article
- Case-control accuracy study for TOY8 digital developmental screening tool for detecting delays among children aged 3-5 years.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Validation of FUNMOVES: A reliable tool for assessing motor skills in Spanish schoolchildren.PloS one · 2025Article
- Decoding Motor Skills: Video Analysis Unveils Age-Specific Patterns in Childhood and Adolescent Movement.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Validity and Reliability of the Fundamental Motor Skills in Sports (FUS) Test for Iranian Children and Adolescents.International journal of school health · 2024Article
- Gross Motor Skills Are Associated with Symptoms of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in School-Aged Children.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- "Track style" children's fundamental movement skills test: construction and verification of an efficient evaluation system.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- The validity and reliability of school-based fundamental movement skills screening to identify children with motor difficulties.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFundamental Movement Skills (FMS) play a critical role in ontogenesis. Many children have insufficient FMS, highlighting the need for universal screening in schools. There are many observational FMS assessment tools, but their psychometric properties are not readily accessible. A systematic review was therefore undertaken to compile evidence of the validity and reliability of observational FMS assessments, to evaluate their suitability for screening.
methodsA pre-search of 'fundamental movement skills' OR 'fundamental motor skills' in seven online databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, EBSCO SPORTDiscus, Ovid PsycINFO and Web of Science) identified 24 assessment tools for school-aged children that: (i) assess FMS; (ii) measure actual motor competence and (iii) evaluate performance on a standard battery of tasks. Studies were subsequently identified that: (a) used these tools; (b) quantified validity or reliability and (c) sampled school-aged children. Study quality was assessed using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklists.
resultsNinety studies were included following the screening of 1863 articles. Twenty-one assessment tools had limited or no evidence to support their psychometric properties. The Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD, n = 34) and the Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC, n = 37) were the most researched tools. Studies consistently reported good evidence for validity, reliability for the TGMD, whilst only 64% of studies reported similarly promising results for the MABC. Twelve studies found good evidence for the reliability and validity of the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency but poor study quality appeared to inflate results. Considering all assessment tools, those with promising psychometric properties often measured limited aspects of validity/reliability, and/or had limited feasibility for large scale deployment in a school-setting.
conclusionThere is insufficient evidence to justify the use of any observational FMS assessment tools for universal screening in schools, in their current form.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.