J Phys Act Health. 2019 Aug 1;16(8):657-666. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2018-0179.
To use the meta-analytic approach to assess the effectiveness of different types of movement programs on motor competence (MC) in participants of all ages.
Studies were retrieved by searching 13 databases and included when criteria were met. Studies were selected, and data were extracted by 2 authors. Random effects models using the standardized mean difference effect size (ES) were used to pool results. Risk of bias, heterogeneity, and inconsistency were examined.
Thirty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. A total of 374 ESs were calculated and partitioned into 4 groups (motor intervention, free play, physical education classes, and control group). Statistically significant improvements in MC were observed for the motor intervention (ES = 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18 to 1.82; n = 36), as well as for free play (ES = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.57; n = 5), physical education classes (ES = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.97; n = 15), and smaller statistically significant differences in MC were observed for the control groups (ES = 0.16; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.31; n = 6).
All 4 groups analyzed improved MC in children, adolescents, and young adults. However, motor interventions were superior to all other groups for improving MC.
采用荟萃分析方法评估各种类型的运动方案对所有年龄段参与者运动能力(MC)的有效性。
通过搜索 13 个数据库检索研究,并符合标准时纳入研究。由 2 名作者进行研究选择和数据提取。使用标准化均数差效应量(ES)的随机效应模型来汇总结果。检查偏倚风险、异质性和不一致性。
符合纳入标准的研究共有 36 项。共计算了 374 个 ES,并将其分为 4 组(运动干预组、自由游戏组、体育课组和对照组)。运动干预组(ES=1.50;95%置信区间[CI],1.18 至 1.82;n=36)和自由游戏组(ES=0.33;95%CI,0.09 至 0.57;n=5)的 MC 均有统计学意义的改善,体育课组(ES=0.52;95%CI,0.08 至 0.97;n=15)和对照组(ES=0.16;95%CI,0.01 至 0.31;n=6)的 MC 改善也具有统计学意义,但差异较小。
分析的 4 组均能改善儿童、青少年和年轻成人的 MC,但运动干预组在改善 MC 方面优于其他所有组。