Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 16;15(7):e0236070.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236070. eCollection 2020.

Reliability of the test of gross motor development: A systematic review

Ezequiel Rey  1 , Aida Carballo-Fazanes  2   3 , Cristina Varela-Casal  1 , Cristian Abelairas-Gómez  2   3   4 ; ALFA-MOV Project collaborators
Affiliations

Reliability of the test of gross motor development: A systematic review

Ezequiel Rey et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Objective: To identify, synthesise and evaluate studies that investigated the reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD) variants.

Methods: A systematic search was employed to identify studies that have investigated internal consistency, inter-rater, intra-rater and test-retest reliability of the TGMD variants through Scopus, Pubmed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Sport Discus and Web of Science databases.

Results: Of the 265 studies identified, 23 were included. Internal consistency, evaluated in 14 studies, confirming good-to-excellent consistency for the overall score and general motor quotient (GMQ), and acceptable-to-excellent levels in both subscales (locomotor and ball skills). Inter-rater reliability, evaluated in 19 studies, showing good-to-excellent intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) values in locomotor skills score, ball skills score, overall score, and GMQ. Intra-rater reliability, evaluated in 13 studies, displaying excellent ICC values in overall score and GMQ, and good-to-excellent ICC values in locomotor skills score and ball skills score. Test-retest reliability was evaluated in 15 studies with 100% of the statistics reported above the threshold of acceptable reliability when ICC was not used. Studies with ICC statistic showed good-to-excellent values in ball skills score, overall score, and GMQ; and moderate-to-excellent values in locomotor skills score.

Conclusions: Overall, the results of this systematic review indicate that, regardless of the variant of the test, the TMGD has moderate-to-excellent internal consistency, good-to-excellent inter-rater reliability, good-to-excellent intra-rater reliability, and moderate-to-excellent test-retest reliability. Considering the few high-quality studies in terms of internal consistency, it would be recommend to carry out further studies in this field to improve their quality. Since there is no gold standard for assessing FMS, TGMD variants could be appropriate when opting for a psychometrical robust test. However, standardized training protocols for coding TGMD variants seem to be necessary both for researchers and practitioners in order to ensure acceptable reliability.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Flow diagram of the search and study selection process.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Inter-rater reliability of locomotor skills.
Open circles: very good quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Closed circles: adequate quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Larger circles: ICC & 95%CI; Smaller circles: ICC.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Inter-rater reliability of ball skills.
Open circles: very good quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Closed circles: adequate quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Larger circles: ICC & 95%CI; Smaller circles: ICC.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Intra-rater reliability of locomotor skills.
a-e: Intra-rater reliability of each rater; Diamonds: Intra-rater reliability of all raters; Open circles: very good quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Closed circles: adequate quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Larger circles: ICC & 95%CI; Smaller circles: ICC.
Fig 5
Fig 5. Intra-rater reliability of ball skills.
a-e: Intra-rater reliability of each rater; Diamonds: Intra-rater reliability of all raters; Open circles: very good quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Closed circles: adequate quality assessment according COSMIN checklist; Larger circles: ICC & 95%CI; Smaller circles: ICC.
Fig 6
Fig 6. Test-retest reliability of locomotor and ball skills.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Gallahue D, Ozmun J, Goodway J. Understanding motor development: infants, children, adolescents, adults. 7th ed New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2012.
    1. Hulteen RM, Morgan PJ, Barnett LM, Stodden DF, Lubans DR. Development of Foundational Movement Skills: A Conceptual Model for Physical Activity Across the Lifespan. Sport Med. 2018; 48: 1533–40. - PubMed
    1. Logan SW, Ross SM, Chee K, Stodden DF, Robinson LE. Fundamental motor skills: A systematic review of terminology. J Sports Sci. 2018; 36: 781–96. 10.1080/02640414.2017.1340660 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Burton A, Miller D. Movement skill assessment. Champaing, IL: Human Kinetics; 1998.
    1. Robinson LE, Stodden DF, Barnett LM, Lopes VP, Logan SW, Rodrigues LP, et al. Motor Competence and its Effect on Positive Developmental Trajectories of Health. Sport Med. 2015; 45: 1273–84. - PubMed

Publication types