ArticlePloS one2024
The "thinking system" in a new school concept: A rhythmic teaching approach in physical education to develop creativity.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nurturing creativity in comfort; Gently pushing the boundaries within a zone of safety.PloS one · 2026Article
- Multisport-Integrated Training for Rugby Instructors: Success and Effects on Minirugby Players.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2024Article
- Relationship Between Multi-Teaching Styles and Didactics Effectiveness on Rugby Instructors and Minirugby Players.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
System Thinking is an actual construct supported by several scientific evidence that offer a perspective on how phenomena relate. Rhythm methodology, teaching-learning, and enjoyment in physical education are the main system elements we hypothesize interacting closely to determine direct or mediated effects on motor creativity and rhythmic perceptive capacity. Seventy-six elementary and middle school students (8.9 ± 2.1 years) were randomly assigned to two groups: a) an intervention group that received a physical education lesson based on rhythmic methodology and b) a control group that received conventional lessons without specific rhythmic interventions. Participants were engaged in eight physical education lessons lasting one hour each for eight weeks. Tests and questionnaires were administered before and after the intervention to evaluate motor creativity, rhythmic perception capacity, self-perception and enjoyment. Two lessons were randomly analyzed to identify the teaching style and motor content (moderate and vigorous activity). The main results revealed direct effects on the intervention group's motor creativity (p = 0.001) and its rhythmic perception capacity (p = 0.02). Furthermore, enjoyment mediated the effects of the intervention on motor creativity (p = 0.01). Finally, the results have shown that self-perception does not mediate the effect of rhythmic intervention group on motor creativity and rhythmic perceptive capacity (p > 0.05). A rhythmic methodology proposed by specific multi-teaching styles can involve children and young people in an enjoyable activity with more moderate to vigorous physical activity.
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.