↓ Skip to main content

Correlates of Gross Motor Competence in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
4 policy sources
twitter
36 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
1230 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Correlates of Gross Motor Competence in Children and Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Published in
Sports Medicine, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40279-016-0495-z
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Gross motor competence confers health benefits, but levels in children and adolescents are low. While interventions can improve gross motor competence, it remains unclear which correlates should be targeted to ensure interventions are most effective, and for whom targeted and tailored interventions should be developed. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the potential correlates of gross motor competence in typically developing children and adolescents (aged 3-18 years) using an ecological approach. Motor competence was defined as gross motor skill competency, encompassing fundamental movement skills and motor coordination, but excluding motor fitness. Studies needed to assess a summary score of at least one aspect of motor competence (i.e., object control, locomotor, stability, or motor coordination). A structured electronic literature search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. Six electronic databases (CINAHL Complete, ERIC, MEDLINE Complete, PsycINFO(®), Scopus and SPORTDiscus with Full Text) were searched from 1994 to 5 August 2014. Meta-analyses were conducted to determine the relationship between potential correlates and motor competency if at least three individual studies investigated the same correlate and also reported standardized regression coefficients. A total of 59 studies were identified from 22 different countries, published between 1995 and 2014. Studies reflected the full range of age groups. The most examined correlates were biological and demographic factors. Age (increasing) was a correlate of children's motor competence. Weight status (healthy), sex (male) and socioeconomic background (higher) were consistent correlates for certain aspects of motor competence only. Physical activity and sport participation constituted the majority of investigations in the behavioral attributes and skills category. Whilst we found physical activity to be a positive correlate of skill composite and motor coordination, we also found indeterminate evidence for physical activity being a correlate of object control or locomotor skill competence. Few studies investigated cognitive, emotional and psychological factors, cultural and social factors or physical environment factors as correlates of motor competence. This systematic review is the first that has investigated correlates of gross motor competence in children and adolescents. A strength is that we categorized correlates according to the specific ways motor competence has been defined and operationalized (object control, motor coordination, etc.), which enables us to have an understanding of what correlates assist what types of motor competence. Indeed our findings do suggest that evidence for some correlates differs according to how motor competence is operationalized.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Germany 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 1226 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 114 9%
Student > Bachelor 108 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 99 8%
Researcher 58 5%
Lecturer 52 4%
Other 233 19%
Unknown 566 46%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 295 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 64 5%
Social Sciences 48 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 46 4%
Unspecified 40 3%
Other 131 11%
Unknown 606 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2025.
All research outputs
#1,389,614
of 34,043,423 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,146
of 3,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,838
of 335,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#24
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,043,423 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,433 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 64.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.