Search

Objective: Construct validity for the Motor Development Scale (MDS) has not been established. The aim of this study was to examine whether the unidimensional model of MDS would be appropriate for children aged 4 to 6 years-old and provide construct validity for the items concerning this age group in Brazil., Methods: A total of 938 children participated in the study (214 4-year-olds, 643 5-year-olds, and 81 6-year-olds). Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to evaluate construct validity of the MDS using a unidimensional model., Results: The CFA for the unidimensional model showed excellent adequacy indices for age 4: χ2(2) = 0.581, p = 0.748, comparative fit index (CFI) = 1.000, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = 1.090, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.000 (90% confidence interval [90%CI] = 0.000 to 0.093, close fit [Cfit] = 0.841); age 5: χ2(2) = 2.669, p = 0.263, CFI = 0.993, TLI = 0.980, RMSEA = 0.023 (90%CI = 0.000 to 0.085, Cfit = 0.682), weighted root mean square residual (WRMR) = 0.407; and age 6: χ2(9) = 8.275, p = 0.506, CFI = 1.000, TLI = 1.010, RMSEA = 0.000 (90%CI = 0.000 to 0.118, Cfit = 0.653), WRMR = 0.495. Reliability was good: ω = 0.87 (95%CI = 0.81 to 0.92)., Conclusion: The proposed unidimensional solution for the MDS provides a concise, parsimonious and reliable way to assess motor development in children aged 4 to 6 years.

Objective: To evaluate the construct validity and model-based reliability of general and specific contributions of the subscales of the Movement Assessment Battery for Children-2 (MABC-2) and Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency-2 (BOT-2) when evaluating motor skills across a range of psychiatric disorders., Methods: Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and bifactor analysis were conducted on BOT-2 data from 187 elementary school students (grades 1 to 6) (mean age: 113 ± 20 months; boys: n = 117, 62.56%) and on MABC-2 data from 127 elementary school students (grade 1) (mean age: 76 ± 2 months; boys: n = 58, 45.67%)., Results: The results of the CFA fit the data for multidimensionality for the BOT-2 and presented poor fit indices for the MABC-2. For both tests, the bifactor model showed that the reliability of the subscales was poor., Conclusions: The BOT-2 exhibited factorial validity with a multidimensional structure among the current samples, but the MABC-2 showed poor fit indices, insufficient to confirm its multidimensional structure. For both tests, most of the reliable variance came from a general motor factor (M-factor), therefore the scoring and reporting of subscale scores were not justified for both tests.