Relationship between meeting physical activity guidelines and motor competence among low-income school youth

Journal Pre-proof Relationship between meeting physical activity guidelines and motor competence among low-income school youth ´ Anthony D. Okely, Samuel W. Logan, Alessandro H. Nicolai Re, Mellina M.L.M. da Silva, Maria T. Cattuzzo, David F. Stodden

PII:

S1440-2440(19)30695-4

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2019.12.014

Reference:

JSAMS 2223

To appear in:

Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport

Received Date:

19 June 2019

Revised Date:

2 December 2019

Accepted Date:

15 December 2019

Please cite this article as: Re´ AHN, Okely AD, Logan SW, da Silva MMLM, Cattuzzo MT, Stodden DF, Relationship between meeting physical activity guidelines and motor competence among low-income school youth, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (2019), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2019.12.014

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2019 Published by Elsevier.

1

Relationship between meeting physical activity guidelines and motor competence among lowincome school youth

Alessandro H. Nicolai Réa, Anthony D. Okelyb, Samuel W. Loganc, Mellina M. L. M. da Silvaa, Maria T. Cattuzzod, David F. Stoddene

Affiliations: aPhysical Education and Health, University of São Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil; bEarly

ro of

Start, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia; cSchool of Biological and Population Health Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA; dSchool of Physical Education, University of Pernambuco, Recife, PE, Brazil; and eDepartment of Physical

-p

Education, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA.

re

Corresponding author: Alessandro H.N. Ré. University of São Paulo. Av. Arlindo Béttio, 1000, São

lP

Paulo, SP, ZIP 03828-000, Brazil. +5511998781446. [email protected]

na

Word count: 3109 Abstract word count: 249

ur

Number of Tables: 3

Supplemental Tables: 3

Jo

Supplemental Figure: 1

2

ABSTRACT Objectives: Global health guidelines suggest that youth should accumulate at least 60 minutes of daily, moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA). The relationship between meeting physical activity (PA) guidelines and motor competence (MC) in youth is relatively unknown. This study assessed levels of MVPA and MC among socially vulnerable youth and determined if meeting the PA guidelines was associated with MC. Design: Cross-sectional. Method: A total of 1,017 youths aged 314 years from three schools participated in the study. Participants wore accelerometers for seven consecutive days to assess PA. Motor competence was assessed using the Test of Gross Motor

ro of

Development, 2nd Edition and the Körperkoordinationstest für Kinder. MVPA and MC were compared by sex and school levels (preschool, elementary school and middle school). Binary logistic regression models examined the predictive power of meeting PA guidelines and age on MC. Results: The

-p

prevalence of meeting PA guidelines declined across school levels among both girls (72% in preschool to 21% in middle school, p<0.001) and boys (84% in preschool to 57% in middle school, p<0.001). MC

re

levels were low and also declined across age in both sexes (p<0.001). During preschool, age (older) was a consistent predictor of low MC, independently of meeting PA guidelines. Conclusion: Except for

lP

adolescent boys, meeting PA guidelines was not associated with higher MC. Public health policies should focus on the quantity and quality of MVPA within schools and on alleviating the decline in PA

na

and MC across childhood and adolescence, with special attention to girls and disadvantaged families.

Jo

ur

Keywords: poverty; health promotion; motor skills; physical education; child; adolescent

3

Practical implications 

These data indirectly support previous research that demonstrates PA continues to decline across childhood and adolescence.



In contexts of social vulnerability, age (older) may be a consistent predictor of low MC, independently of meeting PA guidelines.



Specific sociocultural factors may influence the association between PA and MC.



PA guidelines for youth should be revised to consider the needs of specific populations and sociocultural contexts Public health policies should focus on addressing the decline in PA (both quality and quantity)

ro of



within schools, especially in socially vulnerable populations and specifically in girls.

-p

Introduction

re

Regular physical activity (PA) during youth promotes physical, motor, cognitive and social development, with positive consequences for quality of life and the prevention of chronic-degenerative

lP

diseases.1 Motor competence (MC) is defined as the ability to perform motor skills with adequate proficiency and coordination2 and is an important factor for promoting and sustaining lifelong PA,2.3 health-related fitness and a healthy weight status.3,4 Children with low MC, a condition characterized

na

by an inability to perform motor skills at an age-appropriate level (e.g., below the 15th percentile based on age-normed scores), tend to avoid the practice of PA, which in turn further restricts motor

ur

development and can generate a negative behavioural cycle, increasing the likelihood of physical inactivity and associated non-communicable diseases.2,3,5 Strategies to improve population level PA

Jo

should consider the reciprocal and developmentally dynamic relationship between PA and MC,

2,3

ensuring youth are developing MC as part of their regular PA.6 The World Health Organization recommends that youth should accumulate at least 60 minutes

of daily, moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA),7 including at least 30 minutes of MVPA during school.8 National-level policy-makers are the primary target audience of this recommendation, as this is expected to constitute a resource for them in the development of guidelines

4

for health-enhancing PA.7,8 Surveillance of youth PA typically focuses on the proportion meeting daily recommendations.9,10,11 Evidence suggests low to moderate relationships (r range = 0.16 – 0.55) between PA and MC during youth.12 However, a recent meta-analysis did not find PA to be a consistent predictor of MC,13 in particular, the impact of meeting PA guidelines on the development of MC is not adequately known. Since PA guidelines should impact public health policies,7,8 and considering the importance of MC development during youth,2,3,4 it is important to verify if youth who meet these guidelines show adequate MC levels, particularly those from low-income families who are socially vulnerable. Social vulnerability

ro of

is not necessarily dependent on socioeconomic status;14 rather, it is defined as exposure to a set of underlying factors such as school failure, violence, and lack of appropriate public spaces that may drive the practice of PA and its association with MC.14 Thus, the effects of PA on the development of MC

-p

may be specific to the social context of that person.15,16 For this reason, there is a need for more evidencebased research that may contribute to the public health policies focused on promoting MVPA and MC

re

within the sociocultural contexts and circumstances of socially vulnerable populations. The objectives of this study were to assess levels of MVPA and MC among socially vulnerable youth and to determine

lP

if meeting the PA guidelines was associated with MC.

na

Methods

This study used a cross-sectional design and included a population of socially vulnerable youth

ur

between 3 and 14 years of age from three schools in the east region of São Paulo, Brazil. These schools serve around 2,180 students per academic year. The Ethics Committee of University of São Paulo

Jo

provided permission to conduct this study. Only those youths who provided assent, returned signed parental consent forms, and did not have a medical condition preventing PA practice or assessment of MC were included in the study. The final sample included 1,017 participants (M age = 7.21 ± 2.64 years; 45% girls), divided into preschool (3 to 6 years of age, n = 244 girls and 325 boys), elementary school (7 to 10 years, n = 141 girls and 168 boys) and middle school (11 to 14 years, n = 75 girls and 64 boys). Reporting was done following the STROBE Statement.17

5

Participants’ demographic information included sex and postcodes of school and residence. Body weight and height were measured and used to calculate body mass index (BMI, kg/m2). Postcodes were used to identify the geographical area of living18 and then we used the social vulnerability map of the city of São Paulo,19 which considers the conditions of the place of housing such as access to public services, indicators of urban violence and economic deprivation of families. The schools were selected for convenience (non-probability convenience sample), with the criteria of being located in areas that represent the population living in places of social vulnerability in the city of São Paulo.19 Accelerometers (ActiGraph GT3X+, Pensacola, FL) were used to assess PA and data were

ro of

downloaded with ActiLife software version 6 (ActiGraph Pensacola, FL). Participants wore an accelerometer on the right hip with an elastic belt, and were instructed to take it off only during aquatic activities and sleep.20 Telephone calls and text messages were used to remind parents about the need for

-p

youth to not take off the accelerometer. Activities were recorded in 1-second epoch at a sampling frequency of 30 Hz;9 participants were monitored for seven consecutive days. Non-wear time was

re

defined as 60 minutes of consecutive zeros allowing for 2 min of non-zero interruptions.9 A valid day was defined as at least 500 minutes of valid wear time between 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. Participants who

lP

had valid data for at least 3 days (including at least one weekend day) were included in the study.9 Standard cut-points proposed by Evenson et al.21 were used to define the mean daily minutes and

na

percentage of valid wear time spent in MVPA (≥2296 cpm). The proportion of participants meeting daily PA guidelines (mean MVPA ≥ 60 min)7 and in-school PA guidelines (mean MVPA ≥ 30 min)8

ur

was calculated. To examine the distribution of PA patterns, data were filtered to identify the absolute minutes and percentage of MVPA in-school, on weekdays (in-school and out-of-school), weekends and

Jo

during the full week.

MC was measured using the Test of Gross Motor Development-2 (TGMD-2)22 and the

Körperkoordinationstest für Kinder (KTK).23 Following the original protocols and their respective age range guidelines, children aged 3 to 10 years performed the TGMD-2 and youth between 5 and 14 years of age performed the KTK. The TGMD-2 provides process-oriented measures of fundamental motor skills competence and includes six locomotor and six object control skills. The KTK provides productoriented measures of competence in gross motor coordination and includes balance, laterality and

6

agility. Previous studies have suggested the use of at least two assessments (process- and productoriented) to comprehensively assess MC.5,16 Further details of both assessments and protocols are provided elsewhere.16,22,23 Raw scores on each assessment (Table S1) were converted to age- and sexspecific percentile ranks using normative data of the respective manual.22,23 Scores at or below the 15th percentile are generally accepted as an indicator of motor impairment and scores above the 15th percentile are considered in the range of typical development.5 Therefore, the individual percentile values were used to classify participants as low MC (percentile ≤ 15) or adequate MC (percentile > 15), according to each assessment.

ro of

Descriptive measures (mean, standard deviation and percentage), according to sex, school level and age group were calculated. For PA variables, multivariate kurtosis was calculated and Kline´s24 suggestion that critical ratios of >3 are of concern were adopted .24 None of the models showed

-p

problematic levels of skewness or kurtosis and homogeneity of variance was confirmed with a Levene test, allowing the use of parametric statistics.24 For MC variables (TGMD-2 and KTK), the values of

investigated using non-parametric statistics.24

re

Skewness and Kurtosis oscillated between ± 4 and statistical comparisons within this dataset were

lP

For the intergroup comparison, separate analyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to examine differences between girls and boys and school levels (preschool, elementary school and middle

na

school) in accelerometer wear time, total MVPA and percent of time spent in MVPA. Chi-square tests (χ2) were conducted to determine the association between school level and meeting PA guidelines within

ur

each sex. For the TGMD-2 and the KTK, intergroup comparisons were performed with the use of MannWhitney U tests to examine differences between girls and boys within age groups. Effect sizes (Cohen’s

Jo

d) were calculated with pooled standard deviations selected as denominator and interpreted as trivial (0– 0.19), small (0.20–0.49), medium (0.50–0.79) and large (0.80 and greater), following the procedures outlined by Cohen.25 Logistic regression was used to examine the probability of low MC (as opposed to adequate MC) as a function of meeting the PA guidelines (mean MVPA ≥ 60 minutes daily). Age was included as an independent variable because of its well documented association with both PA and MC.1,16 All models were adjusted for accelerometer wear time. The nested data structure was accounted for via the

7

use of random effects of schools and classrooms within the logistic regression models. The magnitude of the associations was expressed as odds ratios (OR) and their respective 95% confidence intervals. As a result of sex and grade differences in PA and MC, all analyses were calculated separately for girls and boys and school levels. To analyse continuous MVPA and MC data, spearman rank order correlations were calculated between percent of valid accelerometer wear time in MVPA and percentile scores (MC) on each assessment, within each sex and school level. All analyses were performed using SPSS software version 26.0 with significance level set a priori at p < .05. Alpha was adjusted by the Bonferroni correction when carrying out multiple

ro of

comparisons. No imputation or data modelling was used to replace missing data. A test for possible selection bias due to missing information on PA was carried out and no difference between the groups

-p

with or without valid PA data was found for age, BMI, TGMD-2 and KTK classification.

Results

re

Descriptive results and comparisons between sex and school levels in accelerometer wear time and MVPA during different periods of the week are shown in Table S2. Girls spent significantly less

lP

time in MVPA than boys in all school levels and periods of the week (p<0.001, Cohen’s d range from 0.38 for preschool students during weekends to 0.98 for middle school students within the school). In

na

total, 54% of the girls and 78% of boys met the PA guidelines (χ2 = 28.00, p<0.001). Table 1 shows the number and proportion of participants meeting the MVPA guidelines during different periods of the

ur

week. In general, the percentage of girls and boys meeting the guidelines declined dramatically across

Jo

school level (i.e., from preschool to middle school).

Table 1

Figure S1 shows the mean percentile scores for the TGMD-2 and KTK and comparisons between sexes within age groups. In general, MC levels were low across all age groups and there were declines in percentile classifications across age groups of both sexes, suggesting that MC declined with age in relation to normative samples.

8

Tables 2 and 3 show that meeting PA guidelines was not predictive of MC levels (p > 0.1) during childhood (preschool and elementary school). Age was predictive of normative MC during preschool (i.e., 3 to 6 years of age) and meeting PA guidelines was predictive of MC (KTK) only in boys during middle school (p < 0.01). For girls, meeting PA guidelines was not predictive of MC at any school level.

Table 2

ro of

Table 3

Spearman rank order correlations between percent of time in MVPA and percentile classifications of the TGMD-2 (global, locomotor and object control skills) and KTK revealed non-

-p

existent or low values (r range = 0.24 – 0.35) (Table S4).

re

Discussion

The main purposes of this study were to assess levels of MVPA and MC among socially

lP

vulnerable youth and to determine if meeting the PA guidelines was associated with motor competence. There was a significant decline in PA and MC across school levels, mainly among girls. A high

na

prevalence of low MC was identified among participants who met the PA guidelines. During preschool, age was the main predictor of low MC. Although MVPA levels (62 and 75 minutes per day for girls and

ur

boys) and percentage meeting PA guidelines (54% of girls and 78% of boys) were higher than other studies9,20,26 using similar accelerometer cut-points for MVPA (≥ 2296 cpm), MC levels were similar or

Jo

lower than those reported in studies that also found a high prevalence of low MC in the KTK6,27 and in the TGMD-2.20,26,28 For example, the percentage of children from ES meeting the PA guideline (49% of girls and 82% of boys) was noticeably higher than the 10% and 23% of American girls and boys in the same age group that were found to meet the guideline in the study by De Meester et al.,20 however, MC levels (TGMD-2) were higher in the American sample [mean percentile 19.2 (± 22.2) versus 8.5 (± 9.4) in this study]. In contrast to the present study, there was a significant association between meeting the PA guidelines and MC in De Meester’s et al.20 In conjunction with the results of other studies20,26,28 the

9

present study advances current knowledge by reinforcing the understanding that the sociocultural environment can moderate associations between PA and MC15, particularly in youth living under social vulnerability. During preschool, independent of meeting the PA guidelines, each one-year increase in age represented an increase of 2.4 times of presenting low MC for girls (OR = 2.39, CI: 1.17 - 4.88) when using TGMD-2 data and by 11.2 times for girls (OR = 11.22, CI: 1.94 - 64.93) and 28.5 times for boys (OR = 28.51, CI: 2.88 - 282.42) when using the KTK data, suggesting that the restrictions associated with living in an area of social vulnerability may accumulate over childhood. Meeting PA guidelines

ro of

was associated with MC (KTK) only for boys during middle school; boys who met the guidelines were 90% less likely to demonstrate low MC on the KTK (OR = 0.10, CI: 0.01 - 0.65), suggesting that during adolescence activities associated with meeting PA guidelines may have inherently included complex

-p

movement forms that promoted MC.29 This result partially supports the hypothesis that the strength of association between PA and MC may increase with age.3 In addition, the global foundation of locomotor

re

and balance tasks in the KTK may be more aligned to the environmental context associated with this sample and may be more related to quantitative aspects of PA, which could explain the stronger

lP

association between meeting PA guidelines and MC on the KTK among adolescent boys. The relationships (r ranges from 0.24 to 0.35) between continuous PA (%MVPA) and MC

na

(percentiles) scores found in the present study is consistent with previous research that has shown low to moderate relationships (r ranges 0.16 to 0.55) between PA and MC during youth.12 The present study

ur

extends previous research by showing that meeting the PA guidelines did not predict MC, reinforcing that the quantity of MVPA does not necessarily relate or lead to the development of MC.13 The social

Jo

vulnerability associated with this sample (i.e., public violence, limited access to gymnasiums and adequate outdoor environments and equipment)14,19 may limit youth’s opportunities to practice PA in structured (formal) and unstructured (leisure) settings and could impair the development of MC.13,14 Although MC is expected to increase with age to some degree,13 when the raw scores were converted into percentiles according to the normative database from Ulrich (2000, American children) 22 and Kiphard and Schilling (1974, German children),23 the youngest children outperformed the older age groups. That is, youth in the older age groups may have missed out on more opportunities to learn and

10

develop MC due to experiencing social vulnerability for a longer period of time compared to children in the younger age groups, resulting in a negative age effect in MC.16 It is important to note that normative data provided in the manuals of the TGMD-2 and KTK include culture-specific populations that were assessed many years ago. It is possible that based on the sample included in the current study (i.e. socially vulnerable, Brazil) and the time of data collection (i.e. 2018) that there may be cultural and generational factors that explain results. Since current PA guidelines are primarily focused on quantitative aspects of PA associated with health-related fitness,1,8,30 there is a need to broaden this scope to include the development of MC as an important component of health promotion.

ro of

Some limitations of this study should be mentioned. Considering the relative homogeneity of the sample in relation to the geographical area of living, generalization of results to other populations should be made with caution. Since the data were assessed in a cross-sectional study, longitudinal

-p

associations or causal inferences between variables could not be verified. Another limitation was the lack of control regarding the quality of PA. Future research is needed to further investigate the nuances

re

of the relationship between PA and MC in order to understand the impact of movement context on PA and subsequent MC development at different ages and sociocultural contexts. Strengths of this study

lP

included the use process- and product-oriented assessment of MC and a large sample and age range appropriate for motor assessment including the TGMD-2 (3-10 years) and KTK (5 to 14 years). The

na

adoption of the same criteria for accelerometry analysis over a wide age range (3 to 14 years), allowed a greater internal consistency in the comparison of the cross-sectional data. Additionally, this is the first

ur

study to report PA and MC indices in children and adolescents under social vulnerability in São Paulo

Jo

city, one of the largest cities in the world.

Conclusion

The present study shows that the majority of youth living in an area of social vulnerability met

the global PA guidelines, but this dramatically declined across age and the majority of youth demonstrated low levels of MC. These data suggest the need to review the PA guidelines that are currently focused on quantitative aspects of PA which do not necessarily promote the development of MC, as well as an understanding of the types of PA in which youth participate (and their underlying

11

determinants) to better understand how to alleviate the decline in PA and MC across childhood and adolescence. Further investigation of whether the MVPA component of the PA guidelines elicits positive gains across the range of physical fitness parameters may provide a greater understanding of whether the current guidelines are suitable and are achieving their recommended objectives. In addition, it is necessary to further explore and revise public policies to focus on the sociocultural contexts and circumstances of specific populations, with special attention to girls and the quantity and quality of MVPA promoted within the school.

ro of

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for the support of participating children, adolescents, parents and teachers. This work was supported by the Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) under grant

-p

2017/08496-6.

1

re

REFERENCES

Strong WB, Malina RM, Blimkie CJ et al. Evidence based physical activity for school-age youth.

2

lP

J Pediatr 2005; 146(6):732–737. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2005.01.055 Robinson LE, Stodden DF, Barnett LM et al. Motor competence and its effect on positive developmental trajectories of health. Sports Med 2015; 45(9):1273–1284. doi:10.1007/s40279015-0351-6

Stodden DF, Goodway JD, Langendorfer SJ et al. A developmental perspective on the role of motor

na

3

skill competence in physical activity: an emergent relationship. Quest 2008; 60(2):290–306. doi:10.1080/00336297.2008.10483582

Cattuzzo MT, Henrique RS, Ré AHN et al. Motor competence and health related physical fitness in

ur

4

youth:

a

systematic

review.

J

Sci

Med

Sport

2016;

19(2):123–129.

Jo

doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2014.12.004

5

Blank R, Engelsman BS, Polatajko H et al. European Academy for Childhood Disability (EACD): Recommendations on the definition, diagnosis and intervention of developmental coordination disorder (long version). Dev Med Child Neuro 2012; 54(1):54-93. doi:10.1111/j.14698749.2011.04171.x

6

Lima RA, Pfeiffer K, Larsen LR et al. Physical activity and motor competence present a positive reciprocal longitudinal relationship across childhood and early adolescence. J Phys Act Health 2017; 14(6):440-447. doi:10.1123/jpah.2016-0473

12

7

World Health Organization. Global recommendations on physical activity for health. Geneva: World Health Organization 2010.

8

Pate RR, Davis MG, Robinson TN et al. Promoting physical activity in children and youth. Circulation 2006; 114(11):1214–1224. doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.177052

9

Cooper AR, Goodman A, Page AS et al. Objectively measured physical activity and sedentary time in youth: the International children’s accelerometry database (ICAD). Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2015; 12(1):113. doi:10.1186/s12966-015-0274-5

10 Hallal PC, Andersen LB, Bull FC et al. Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet 2012; 380(9838):247-257. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60646-1 11 Guthold R, Cowan MJ, Autenrieth CS et al. Physical activity and sedentary behavior among a

34-country

comparison.

J

Pediatrics

2010;

157(1):43-49.e1.

ro of

schoolchildren:

doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2010.01.019

12 Logan SW, Webster EK, Getchell N et al. Relationship between fundamental motor skill competence and physical activity during childhood and adolescence: a systematic review. Kinesiology Review 2015; 4(4):416-426. doi:10.1123/kr.2013-0012

-p

13 Barnett LM, Lai SK, Veldman SLC et al. Correlates of gross motor competence in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med 2016; 46(11):1663-1688.

re

doi:10.1007/s40279-016-0495-z

14 Blum RW, McNeely C, Nonnemaker J. Vulnerability, risk, and protection. J Adolesc Health 2002; 31(1):28–39. doi:10.1016/s1054-139x(02)00411-1

movement

skill

and

lP

15 Barnett LM, Telford RM, Strugnell C et al. Impact of cultural background on fundamental its

correlates.

J

Sports

Sci

2019;

37(5):492–499.

doi:10.1080/02640414.2018.1508399.

na

16 Ré AHN, Logan S, Cattuzzo MT, et al. Comparison of motor competence levels on two assessments across childhood. J Sports Sci 2018; 36(1):1-6. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1276294 17 Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational

ur

Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2007; 4(10):e297. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297

Jo

18 Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics. Sociodemographic and health indicators in Brazil 2009. Retrieved from https://www.ibge.gov.br/en/home-eng.html (accessed 10 Jun 2019).

19 Alves HPF Socio-environmental vulnerability in the Metropolis of São Paulo, Brazil: a sociodemographic analysis of spatial coexistence of social and environmental risks and problems. Rev Bras Estud Popul 2006; 23(1):43-59. doi:10.1590/S0102-30982006000100004 20 De Meester A, Stodden D, Goodway J et al. Identifying a motor proficiency barrier for meeting physical

activity

guidelines

doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2017.05.007

in

children.

J

Sci

Med

Sport

2018;

21(1):58-62.

13

21 Evenson KR, Catellier DJ, Gill K et al. Calibration of two objective measures of physical activity for children. J Sports Sci 2008; 26(14):1557-1565. doi:10.1080/02640410802334196 22 Ulrich DA. Test of gross motor development-2. Austin TX, Pro-Ed 2000. 23 Kiphard EJ, Schilling F. Körperkoordinationstest für Kinder [Body Coordination Test for Children]. Manual. Weinheim, Germany, Beltz Test GmbH 1974. 24 Kline RB Principles and practice of structural equation modelling. 4th Edition. New York, The Guilford press 2016. 25 Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992; 112(1):155–159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155. 26 Cohen KE, Morgan PJ, Plotnikoff RC et al. Fundamental movement skills and physical activity among children living in low-income communities: a cross-sectional study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2014; 11(1):49. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-11-49

ro of

27 Reyes AC, Chaves R, Baxter-Jones ADG et al. Modelling the dynamics of children’s gross motor coordination. J Sports Sci 2019; 37(19):2243–2252. doi:10.1080/02640414.2019.1626570

28 Brian A, Pennell A, Taunton S et al. Motor competence levels and developmental delay in early childhood: a multicenter cross-sectional study conducted in the USA. Sports Med 2019;

-p

49(10):1619–1620. doi:10.1007/s40279-019-01156-z

29 Tyler R, Foweather L, Mackintosh KA et al. A Dynamic assessment of children’s physical

re

competence. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2018; 50(12):2474–2487. doi:10.1249/mss.0000000000001739 30 Morrow JR., Tucker JS, Jackson A et al. Meeting Physical Activity Guidelines and Health-Related

Jo

ur

na

TABLES (next pages)

lP

Fitness in Youth. Am J Prev Med 2013; 44(5):439–444. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.01.008

14

Table 1 - Number and proportion of students meeting PA guidelines within the school, on weekdays (inschool and out-of-school), on weekends and during the full week, according to sex and school level. * Boys

χ2 = 41.91, p < 0.001

χ2 = 59.16, p < 0.001

38 (42.2%)

68 (54.8%)

0 (0%)

2 (2.6%)

4 (9.5%)

27 (50%)

χ2 = 22.90, p < 0.001

χ2 = 13.84, p = 0.001

Preschool

60 (66.7%)

103 (83.1%)

Elementary school

37 (62.7%)

66 (85.7%)

Middle school

10 (23.8%)

33 (61.1%)

Weekends

χ2 = 32.05, p < 0.001

χ2 = 5.29, p = 0.071

Preschool

60 (66.7%)

92 (74.2%)

Elementary school

26 (44.1%)

50 (64.9%)

Middle school

6 (14.3%)

31 (57.4%)

χ2 = 30.52, p < 0.001

χ2 = 16.28, p < 0.001

65 (72.2%)

104 (83.9%)

29 (49.2%)

63 (81.8%)

In-school Preschool Elementary school Middle school Weekdays (including in-school and out-of- school)

Full week (including weekdays and weekends) Preschool

re

Elementary school

ro of

Girls

-p

Meeting PA guidelines

Middle school

9 (21.4%)

31 (57.4%)

Jo

ur

na

lP

* Chi-Squares (χ2 ) tests the association between school level and meeting PA guidelines within the same sex.

15

Table 2 - Logistic regression for predicting low MC (TGMD-2) during preschool and elementary school. TGMD-2

Preschool (PS) β

Odds ratio

Elementary School (ES)

Lower

Upper

n = 87

Girls Guidelines (yes)

-0.65 0.87

Age (years)

Odds ratio

Lower

Upper

n = 58 0.52

0.18

1.52

-0.23

0.80

0.21

2.96

2.39*

1.17

4.88

0.10

1.10

0.49

2.47

n = 116

Boys

β

n = 76

Guidelines (yes)

-0.73

0.48

0.15

1.56

-1.83

0.16

0.02

1.50

Age (years)

0.63

1.88

0.89

3.97

0.59

1.81

0.83

3.95

-p

ro of

*p<0.01

Table 3 - Logistic regression for predicting low MC (KTK) during preschool, elementary school

KTK

Preschool (PS)

n = 60

Girls

Elementary school (ES)

β

lP

Odds Lower Upper ratio

β

re

and middle school.

Odds LowerUpper ratio

n = 56

Middle school (MS)

β

Odds LowerUpper ratio

n = 38

0.45

1.57

0.32 7.66

-0.14

0.87

0.26 2.89 -1.04

0.35

0.05 2.34

Age (years)

2.42

11.22*

1.94 64.93

0.59

1.81

0.82 3.97 -0.08

0.93

0.38 2.27

n = 74

Boys

1.00

Age (years)

3.35

Jo

n = 75

n = 47

2.71

0.27 27.14

-1.19

0.30

0.08 1.20 -2.33

0.10*

0.01 0.65

28.51*

2.88 282.42

-0.05

0.95

0.52 1.74 -0.72

0.49

0.19 1.24

ur

Guidelines (yes)

*p<0.01

na

Guidelines (yes)