-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Test of Motor Proficiency Second Edition (BOT-2): Compatibility of the Complete and Short Form and Its Usefulness for Middle-Age School Children
J. Jírovec, M. Musálek, F. Mess,
Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2013
Free Medical Journals
od 2013
PubMed Central
od 2013
Europe PubMed Central
od 2013
Open Access Digital Library
od 2013-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2013-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 2013
PubMed
31065548
DOI
10.3389/fped.2019.00153
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Background: The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency Second Edition (BOT-2) assesses the psychomotor development. It is available in two forms. According to several studies the BOT-2 short form (SF) provides significantly higher results than the BOT-2 complete form (CF). This might be due to the use of an inadequate type of scores when comparing results of the SF and the CF. Objective: To verify whether the degree of psychomotor development assessed by the BOT-2 SF is comparable to the results of the BOT-2 CF in middle-age school children when using standard scores considering age and sex. Methods: The research sample consisted of n = 153 neurotypical children (n = 69 girls, n = 84 boys) from 8 to 11 years (9.53 ± 0.85). The degree of psychomotor development was determined by the standard scores of the BOT-2 CF and BOT-2 SF-both considering sex and age. The conformity in results between the CF and the SF, the sensitivity and specificity of the BOT-2 SF and the relations between the results of each sub-test within the BOT-2 CF and the BOT-2 SF were analyzed. Results: The BOT-2 SF provided a statistically significantly lower standard score x = 45.87 (±5.41) compared to the BOT-2 CF x = 47.57 (±8.29) p < 0.05 with middle effect size value, Hays ω2 = 0.09. The ROC analysis showed that the BOT-2 SF obtains sufficient sensitivity (84%) but poor specificity (42.9%) and AUC = 0.484 CI95% (0.31-0.62). Moreover, only 57% of total variance of the BOT-2 CF is explained by the relation between the results of the CF and the SF. Conclusion: The BOT-2 SF does not provide practically significant different results compared to the BOT-2 CF when using a proper scale for comparing both versions. In addition, poor specificity of the BOT-SF suggests that the BOT-2 SF might be a useful tool to reveal mainly psychomotorically delayed but not above average (psychomotorically advanced) children. Further, due to the weak portion of a shared common factor, it remains still unclear whether the BOT-2 CF and the BOT-2 SF measure the same behavioral domain.
Department of Sport and Health Sciences Technical University of Munich Munich Germany
Faculty of Physical Education and Sport Charles University Prague Czechia
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc19029034
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20190819104353.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 190813s2019 sz f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.3389/fped.2019.00153 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)31065548
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a sz
- 100 1_
- $a Jírovec, Jan $u Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, Prague, Czechia.
- 245 10
- $a Test of Motor Proficiency Second Edition (BOT-2): Compatibility of the Complete and Short Form and Its Usefulness for Middle-Age School Children / $c J. Jírovec, M. Musálek, F. Mess,
- 520 9_
- $a Background: The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency Second Edition (BOT-2) assesses the psychomotor development. It is available in two forms. According to several studies the BOT-2 short form (SF) provides significantly higher results than the BOT-2 complete form (CF). This might be due to the use of an inadequate type of scores when comparing results of the SF and the CF. Objective: To verify whether the degree of psychomotor development assessed by the BOT-2 SF is comparable to the results of the BOT-2 CF in middle-age school children when using standard scores considering age and sex. Methods: The research sample consisted of n = 153 neurotypical children (n = 69 girls, n = 84 boys) from 8 to 11 years (9.53 ± 0.85). The degree of psychomotor development was determined by the standard scores of the BOT-2 CF and BOT-2 SF-both considering sex and age. The conformity in results between the CF and the SF, the sensitivity and specificity of the BOT-2 SF and the relations between the results of each sub-test within the BOT-2 CF and the BOT-2 SF were analyzed. Results: The BOT-2 SF provided a statistically significantly lower standard score x = 45.87 (±5.41) compared to the BOT-2 CF x = 47.57 (±8.29) p < 0.05 with middle effect size value, Hays ω2 = 0.09. The ROC analysis showed that the BOT-2 SF obtains sufficient sensitivity (84%) but poor specificity (42.9%) and AUC = 0.484 CI95% (0.31-0.62). Moreover, only 57% of total variance of the BOT-2 CF is explained by the relation between the results of the CF and the SF. Conclusion: The BOT-2 SF does not provide practically significant different results compared to the BOT-2 CF when using a proper scale for comparing both versions. In addition, poor specificity of the BOT-SF suggests that the BOT-2 SF might be a useful tool to reveal mainly psychomotorically delayed but not above average (psychomotorically advanced) children. Further, due to the weak portion of a shared common factor, it remains still unclear whether the BOT-2 CF and the BOT-2 SF measure the same behavioral domain.
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Musálek, Martin $u Faculty of Physical Education and Sport, Charles University, Prague, Czechia.
- 700 1_
- $a Mess, Filip $u Department of Sport and Health Sciences, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00194312 $t Frontiers in pediatrics $x 2296-2360 $g Roč. 7, č. - (2019), s. 153
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31065548 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20190813 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20190819104627 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ind $b bmc $g 1434183 $s 1067494
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2019 $b 7 $c - $d 153 $e 20190418 $i 2296-2360 $m Frontiers in pediatrics $n Front Pediatr $x MED00194312
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20190813