Search

Objectives: Observational screening instruments are often used as an effective, economical first step in the identification of children with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD). The aim was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Finnish version of the Motor Observation Questionnaire for Teachers (MOQ-T-FI)., Methods: The psychometric properties were tested using two separate samples (S1: age range 6-12, M 9y 5mo, females 101, males 92; S2: age range 6-9, M 7y 7mo, females 404, males 446). Teachers completed the MOQ-T-FI in both samples, and in sample 2 teachers' ratings were compared to student's performance on the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (MABC-2). Internal consistency was investigated by using Cronbach's alpha, predictive validity by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, concurrent validity by correlation analysis, and construct validity by factor analysis., Results: The MOQ-T-FI behaves consistently with its original Dutch version. The internal consistency was excellent (α=0.97). The bifactor model, with one general factor and two specific factors, fit the data significantly better than the first-order model. The concurrent validity with the MABC-2 was moderate (r=0.37 p<0.001). Sensitivity was 82.5% and specificity 44.5%, respectively., Conclusion: Notwithstanding the low specificity the MOQ-T-FI can be considered as a promising screening tool in the school environment for Finnish children at risk of motor learning problems., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The aim of this review was to investigate the selection criteria used in the past in studies of children with developmental motor problems (excluding those suffering from neurological dysfunctions such as cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, etc.). We therefore conducted an extensive analysis of 176 publications. First, an overview of the main characteristics of these studies (terminology, population, type and purpose) and the selection criteria that are reported in these publications are presented. Following this, the DSM-IV selection criteria for developmental coordination disorder (DCD) are contrasted with the selection criteria reported in 41 publications that have used this terminology to classify the children. The results of this comparison show that the inclusion criteria are largely followed, albeit with little consistency concerning selection instruments and quantitative cut-offs, while adherence to the exclusion criteria is not common practice. Strengths and weaknesses of the DSM-IV criteria, complementary to the previous discussion by Henderson and Barnett in the HMS special issue on DCD in 1998 on this same topic, are discussed. The results of the review also show that many studies have used additional selection criteria related to the specific research questions of the study concerned. In the broader context of clinical practice as well as basic research, the latter result suggests the usefulness of a distinction between Clinical Diagnostic Criteria and Research Diagnostic Criteria. This distinction helps to develop a unifying view on the use of diagnostic criteria for research and clinical practice. We conclude with a number of recommendations concerning the selection criteria for children with DCD.

The aim of this study was to investigate whether children with a Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) experience problems in the processing of visual, proprioceptive or tactile information. Different aspects of visual perception were tested with the Developmental Test of Visual Perception (DTVP-2), tactile perception was assessed with the Tactual Performance Test (TPT), and a manual pointing task was employed to measure the ability to use visual and proprioceptive information in goal-directed movements. Nineteen children with DCD and nineteen age and sex-matched controls participated in this study. Differences between groups were most pronounced in the subtests measuring visual-motor integration of the DTVP-2, and in two subtests measuring visual perception (visual closure and position in space). On average the children with DCD performed slightly below the norm for tactile perception, with only three children failing the norm. On the manual pointing task, children with DCD made inconsistent responses towards the targets in all three conditions (visual, visual-proprioceptive and proprioceptive condition). No significant differences between groups were found for absolute error. Inspection of the individual data revealed that only two children failed on the majority of perceptual tasks in the three modalities. Across tasks, no consistent pattern of deficits appeared, illustrating the heterogeneity of the problems of children with DCD.