ArticleBMC public health2026
The interplay of actual and perceived motor competencies, physical activity and well-being: a child-centered approach.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMotor development models highlight the interplay between actual motor competence, perceived motor competence and physical activity in children. In studies, mental health parameters, such as well-being, are mostly considered as an outcome of PA or motor development, but they can also be the prerequisite for participation in PA. While variable centered studies have explored mostly correlations among these factors, there is a need to adopt person-centered approaches to identify distinct profiles based on these variables. Understanding these profiles can support targeted interventions to promote healthy motor development.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study involving n = 427 children (M = 7.78 years, SD = 0.70). Actual motor competence was assessed via motor competence test, perceived motor competence via self-perception and physical activity and well-being via parent questionnaires. Latent profile analysis was conducted to identify distinct profiles based on the characteristics of the investigated constructs.
resultsLatent profile analysis revealed three distinct profiles. Highly competent team players (profile 1), who were characterized by high actual and perceived motor competencies in “object movement”, high participation in team sports and high well-being scores. Competent self-movers (profile 2), who exhibited good actual and perceived motor competencies, engaged primarily in individual sports and high well-being. Low-participating overestimators (profile 3), who demonstrated low actual motor competencies but high perceived motor competencies with an overestimation of their competencies, low involvement in organized sports and significant lower well-being compared to the other profiles.
conclusionThis study identifies distinct profiles in children’s motor development parameters, emphasizing the complex interplay between actual motor competencies, perceived motor competencies, physical activity and well-being. The presence of a profile with low actual motor competencies, physical activity and well-being indicates that a certain level of these factors may be necessary for active motor development. Tailored interventions should not only address physical activity or actual motor competencies but also encourage positive-realistic self-assessment and increased participation in physical activity, especially organized sports, to enhance both motor development and well-being.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.