ArticleHeliyon2022
The effect of a motor intervention programme for learners identified with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities.
Article in Heliyon, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Self-Controlled Feedback and Behavioral Outcomes in Motor Skill Learning: A Meta-Analysis.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Intellectual disabilities (ID) cause problems in intellectual and adaptive functioning which negatively affect motor proficiency levels. Aim: This study investigates the impact of a motor intervention programme on the motor proficiency levels of learners identified with moderate to severe ID. Method: A quasi-experimental design was used to recruit participants which included 46 learners aged 15-17 years, identified with moderate to severe ID, selected from a South African special school. Participants were randomly divided into two groups. The 15 experimental learners received a 30-minute motor intervention programme, 3 times a week for a period of 6 weeks, whereas the 23 control learners continued with their normal physical education classes. Groups were assessed using the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency, second edition (BOT-2) Brief Form. Results: The motor intervention programme significantly improved the total scores (p = 0.0380) and the overall motor proficiency levels (p = 0.0447) of the experimental group. Conclusions: This study reveals evidence that a motor intervention programme can be used as an effective means to improve the motor proficiency levels of learners with moderate to severe ID. Implications: A motor intervention should be implemented as soon as possible to enhance the motor proficiency levels of these learners.
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.