Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCarballo Fazanes, Aida
dc.contributor.authorRey Eiras, Ezequiel 
dc.contributor.authorValentini, Nadia C.
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Fernández, José E.
dc.contributor.authorVarela Casal, Cristina 
dc.contributor.authorRico Díaz, Javier 
dc.contributor.authorBarcala Furelos, Roberto Jesus 
dc.contributor.authorAbelairas Gómez, Cristian 
dc.date.accessioned2021-05-24T12:07:59Z
dc.date.available2021-05-24T12:07:59Z
dc.date.issued2021-02-09
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(4): 1652 (2021)spa
dc.identifier.issn16604601
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11093/2171
dc.description.abstractThe Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD) is one of the most common tools for assessing the fundamental movement skills (FMS) in children between 3 and 10 years. This study aimed to examine the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability of the TGMD—3rd Edition (TGMD-3) between expert and novice raters using live and video assessment. Five raters [2 experts and 3 novices (one of them BSc in Physical Education and Sport Science)] assessed and scored the performance of the TGMD-3 of 25 healthy children [Female: 60%; mean (standard deviation) age 9.16 (1.31)]. Schoolchildren were attending at one public elementary school during the academic year 2019–2020 from Santiago de Compostela (Spain). Raters scored each children performance through two viewing moods (live and slow-motion). The ICC (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient) was used to determine the agreement between raters. Our results showed moderate-to-excellent intra-rater reliability for overall score and locomotor and ball skills subscales; moderate-to-good inter-rater reliability for overall and ball skills; and poor-to-good for locomotor subscale. Higher intra-rater reliability was achieved by the expert raters and novice rater with physical education background compared to novice raters. However, the inter-rater reliability was more variable in all the raters regardless of their experience or background. No significant differences in reliability were found when comparing live and video assessments. For clinical practice, it would be recommended that raters reach an agreement before the assessment to avoid subjective interpretations that might distort the results.spa
dc.description.sponsorshipMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (España) | Ref. RTI2018-096106-A-I00spa
dc.description.sponsorshipMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades (España) | Ref. FPU19/02017spa
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Healthspa
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.titleIntra-rater (live vs. video assessment) and inter-rater (expert vs. novice) reliability of the test of gross motor development—Third editionspa
dc.typearticlespa
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessspa
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/ijerph18041652
dc.identifier.editorhttps://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/1652spa
dc.publisher.departamentoDidácticas especiaisspa
dc.publisher.grupoinvestigacionEquipo de Investigación en Rendemento e Motricidade do Salvamento e Socorrismospa
dc.subject.unesco2411.06 Fisiología del Ejerciciospa
dc.subject.unesco2411.18 Fisiología del Movimientospa
dc.subject.unesco1209.03 Análisis de Datosspa
dc.date.updated2021-05-24T08:06:41Z
dc.computerCitationpub_title=International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health|volume=18|journal_number=4|start_pag=1652|end_pag=spa


Files in this item

[PDF]

    Show simple item record

    Attribution 4.0 International
    Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 4.0 International