Observational studyBMJ open2026
Longitudinal changes in motor skills and parental responses following early motor screening in preschool children: a 6-month observational follow-up study.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis follow-up study examined changes in motor performance over 6 months among preschool children in Tyrol, Austria, initially screened for motor difficulties suggestive of developmental coordination disorder. It also investigated parental actions initiated after early testing that may be relevant for subsequent motor skill development.
designThis study is a longitudinal observational follow-up study based on a previously assessed cohort. Children's motor development was reassessed 6 months after baseline using the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (M-ABC-2). Information on any interventions initiated in the interim was collected via parent report.
settingFollow-up assessments were conducted 6 months after the initial testing under standardised conditions in physiotherapy practices by the same trained and experienced examiners.
participants36 children (aged 4-6 years) from the original cohort who previously completed the M-ABC-2 were re-assessed. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in domain-specific motor performance over 6 months. The secondary outcome was parental actions initiated following early testing which may influence subsequent motor development.
resultsChildren with initial motor difficulties showed significant improvements in manual dexterity and aiming and catching (p=0.016 and p=0.039, respectively), while balance improvements were not statistically significant. Conversely, children with previously age-appropriate scores showed no significant gains and a notable decline in balance (p=0.012). Most parents of children with initial difficulties reported initiating supportive actions, including home-based activities and formal therapy. However, 41.6% of children still scored below the 15th percentile at the M-ABC-2 at follow-up.
conclusionsChildren with initial domain-specific motor difficulties showed improvements over 6 months, particularly in manual dexterity and aiming and catching, whereas balance deficits appeared more persistent. Causal effects of home-based activities and formal therapeutic interventions cannot be inferred.
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.