Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40337537›Full record

ArticleThe British journal of occupational therapy2024

Assessing physical literacy with school-aged children in occupational therapy practice: An exploratory qualitative study.

Emma Clark, Amber Elliott, Alethea Jerebine, Lisa M Barnett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The British journal of occupational therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Emma ClarkSchool of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0597-9567
Amber ElliottSchool of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Alethea JerebineSchool of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.
Lisa M BarnettSchool of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Physical literacy (the physical, psychological, social and cognitive capacities needed for movement and physical activity) is arguably important to occupational therapy yet is not explicit within current practice. This study aimed to understand how occupational therapists can engage with the physical literacy concept. Method: Eight paediatric occupational therapists were recruited by purposive sampling. Participants completed up to three semi-structured interviews to understand perspectives on physical literacy, introduce a novel pictorial assessment and to seek feedback on the assessment after trialling. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Sixteen interviews were conducted. Four themes were identified: 'Foreign tongue' (occupational therapists have an understanding of physical literacy but used different terminology); 'Sounds very OT oriented' (illustrating the connection between physical literacy and occupational therapy); 'We need the child's voice' (measure highlights the child's perspective); and 'Contemporary, useful BUT not for all' (measure had utility for some children but was dependant on child's condition). Conclusion: Occupational therapists can apply the physical literacy construct to traditional models and core concepts. The assessment can be used in paediatric occupational therapy practice supported by clinical reasoning, although future tool iterations may need to accommodate some children with disability.

Indexed as

Assessmentclinical practicepaediatricphysical activity

Identifiers

PMID40337537
PMCPMC12033605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.