Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 14 items for

  • Author: E. Andrew Pitchford x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

ZáNean McClain and E. Andrew Pitchford

Restricted access

E. Andrew Pitchford and Joonkoo Yun

The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of spring-levered and piezoelectric pedometers for adults with and without Down syndrome (DS). Twenty adults with DS and 24 adults without a disability walked for two minute periods on a predetermined indoor course at a self-selected, slower and faster pace. Pedometer recorded and criterion observed steps were compared to determine pedometer error. There was a significant interaction between pedometer model and walking speed. Piezoelectric pedometers demonstrated significantly less measurement error than spring-levered pedometers, particularly at slower walking speeds. There were also significant differences in pedometer error between adults with and without DS. The study concludes that pedometer measurement error is significantly different for adults with DS but also that piezoelectric pedometers can be used in the future to measure walking activity for adults with and without DS.

Restricted access

E. Andrew Pitchford and Joonkoo Yun

Background:

Pedometers are a common instrument used to measure walking activity, yet reliability evidence in disability populations, particularly Down syndrome (DS), has received little attention. There may be systematic and random sources of error that could influence reliability under natural walking conditions. The purpose of this study was to examine the sources of variance and estimate reliability coefficients of spring-levered (SL) and piezoelectric (PZ) pedometers for adults with DS during a free-walking bout.

Methods:

Seventeen adults with DS and 23 adults without a disability walked continuously for a 20-minute period wearing 2 types of pedometers, SL and PZ. Step counts were analyzed using Generalizability theory to partition and quantify variance components and calculate reliability coefficients.

Results:

The largest variance component was due to individual participant differences. Adults with DS demonstrated greater intraindividual variability, but also had relatively low proportions of residual variance, or unexplained error. The SL pedometer showed problems with interunit variance while the PZ pedometer demonstrated little systematic error. Reliability coefficients were consistently higher for the PZ pedometer.

Conclusions:

This study found minimal systematic error and moderate reliability evidence for the PZ pedometer. This type of pedometer may be used in future research for adults with DS.

Restricted access

E. Andrew Pitchford and E. Kipling Webster

The Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD) measures fundamental motor skills competency and is frequently used for eligibility determination of adapted physical education services in children with disabilities. The purpose of this study was to determine if the TGMD-3 is clinically sensitive to detect deficits in the fundamental motor skills of children with disabilities (i.e., intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, language and articulation disorders). Eighty-five children with disabilities and 85 matched controls (i.e., typically developing, individually matched on age, sex, ethnicity, and race) completed the TGMD-3. Mann–Whitney U tests identified significant differences in the total TGMD-3 scores for children with intellectual disability (p < .001), autism spectrum disorder (p < .001), and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (p = .032). No differences were identified for children with language and articulation disorders. Comparisons of subscales (i.e., locomotor and ball skills) differed across disability groups. This study provides evidence that the TGMD-3 is clinically sensitive to identify deficits in fundamental motor skills competency.

Restricted access

ZáNean McClain, E. Andrew Pitchford and Jill Pawlowski

Restricted access

ZáNean McClain, E. Andrew Pitchford and E. Kipling Webster

Restricted access

ZáNean McClain, Daniel W. Tindall and E. Andrew Pitchford

Restricted access

Kerri L. Staples, E. Andrew Pitchford and Dale A. Ulrich

The Test of Gross Motor Development is among the most commonly used measures of gross motor competency in children. An important attribute of any developmental assessment is its sensitivity to detect change. The purpose of this study was to examine the instructional sensitivity of the Test of Gross Motor Development—third edition (TGMD-3) performance criteria to changes in performance for 48 children (age 4–7 years) with and without Down syndrome following 10 weeks of physical education. Paired t tests identified significant improvements for all children on locomotor (p < .01) and ball skills (p < .01). These significant differences were associated with moderate to large effect sizes. SEM was low relative to the maximum raw score for each subtest, indicating high confidence in the scores. These findings provide evidence that the TGMD-3 is sensitive to change in performance for children with and without Down syndrome.

Restricted access

ZáNean McClain, E. Andrew Pitchford, E. Kipling Webster, Michaela A. Schenkelberg and Jill Pawlowski

Restricted access

ZáNean McClain, E. Andrew Pitchford, E. Kipling Webster, Daniel W. Tindall and Seo Hee Lee