ArticleFrontiers in digital health2023
Validation of remote assessment of preschool children's anthropometrics and motor skills.
Article in Frontiers in digital health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Remote Assessment of Pediatric Anthropometrics.Pediatrics · 2025Article
- Remote assessment of physical fitness via videoconferencing: a systematic review.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Evaluation of indoor activities for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in preschoolers.Journal of sports sciences · 2024Article
- Validation of remote child weight and height measurements within a weight management trial.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2024Article
- Guidelines and best practices for assessing young children remotely.Frontiers in public health · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Remotely delivered treatment and research procedures were rapidly adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is unclear if these measures are valid. The purpose of this study was to compare the validity of anthropometry and motor skill proficiency measurements collected in a remote-setting to in-person setting among a sample of children ages 3-4 years. Methods: Child anthropometry and motor skill performance were measured in-person by trained assessors and by parents at home with remote supervision via videoconference by trained assessors. The following measures from the National Institutes of Health Toolbox were collected: anthropometry (height and weight), manual dexterity/manipulation (9-hole pegboard), motor coordination and agility (supine timed up and go), lower body strength (standing long jump), and postural stability (one-leg standing balance). Differences in expert and parent-based measurements were assessed using Bland-Altman plots, paired samples t-tests, and Pearson correlations. Results: A total of Discussion: Remote measurements of motor skills and weight are valid assessments for researchers and clinicians to utilize in young children. Remote assessment with guidance offers comparable and valid estimates as in-person assessment, potentially offering a solution to resource-constricted barriers in research and access to care. There is an opportunity for researchers to fine-tune remote height and individual-level assessment strategies.
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.