ReviewBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Assessing the Measurement Properties of the Test of Gross Motor Development-3 Using the COSMIN Methodology-A Systematic Review.
Review in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Assessing the reliability and validity of the sport motivation scale-II using the COSMIN methodology-a systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Effectiveness of school-based interventions on fundamental movement skills in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- PLAYshop Randomized Controlled Trial: Efficacy and Implementation of a Virtually Delivered Parent-Focused Physical Literacy Intervention for Early Childhood.Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to systematically review the measurement properties of the Test of Gross Motor Development-3 (TGMD-3) using the COSMIN methodology. A search of four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL) identified 23 relevant studies. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the COSMIN risk of bias checklist; the measurement properties of the TGMD-3 were evaluated by the COSMIN quality criteria; and the quality of the evidence was rated using a modified GRADE approach. The findings indicated that the test-retest, inter-rater, and intra-rater reliability, as well as measurement invariance and part content validity (relevance and comprehensibility), were sufficient, supported by high-quality evidence. The bifactor structure was found to be a more appropriate model for the TGMD-3, with structural validity and internal consistency rated as sufficient, though based on moderate-quality evidence. However, hypothesis testing for construct validity produced inconsistent results, also supported by moderate-quality evidence. Responsiveness was rated as inconsistent, based on low-quality evidence. Overall, the TGMD-3 is graded as "B", meaning it has the potential to be recommended, but further research is needed to fully establish its measurement properties. Future studies should focus on verifying the comprehensiveness of items of the TGMD-3 to optimise its application.
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.