Background Fundamental Movement Skills (FMS) play a critical role in ontogenesis. Many children have insufficient FMS, highlighting the need for universal screening in schools. There are many observational FMS assessment tools, but their psychometric properties are not readily accessible. A systematic review was therefore undertaken to compile evidence of the validity and reliability of observational FMS assessments, to evaluate their suitability for screening. Methods A pre-search of 'fundamental movement skills' OR 'fundamental motor skills' in seven online databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, EBSCO SPORTDiscus, Ovid PsycINFO and Web of Science) identified 24 assessment tools for school-aged children that: (i) assess FMS; (ii) measure actual motor competence and (iii) evaluate performance on a standard battery of tasks. Studies were subsequently identified that: (a) used these tools; (b) quantified validity or reliability and (c) sampled school-aged children. Study quality was assessed using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklists. Results Ninety studies were included following the screening of 1863 articles. Twenty-one assessment tools had limited or no evidence to support their psychometric properties. The Test of

Across the lifespan the ability to follow instructions is essential for the successful completion of a multitude of daily activities. This ability will often rely on the storage and processing of information in working memory, and previous research in this domain has found that self-enactment at encoding or observing other-enactment at encoding (demonstration) improves performance at recall. However, no working memory research has directly compared these manipulations. Experiment 1 explored the effects of both self-enactment and demonstration on young adults' (N=48) recall of action-object instruction sequences (e.g. 'spin the circle, tap the square'). Both manipulations improved recall, with demonstration providing relatively larger boosts to performance across conditions. More detailed analyses suggested that this improvement was driven by improving the representations of actions, rather than objects, in these action-object sequences. Experiment 2 (N=24) explored this further, removing the objects from the physical environment and comparing partial demonstration (i.e. action-only or object-only) with no or full demonstration. The results showed that partial demonstration only benefitted features that were demonstrated, while full demonstration improved memory for actions, objects and their pairings. Overall these experiments indicate how self-enactment, and particularly demonstration, can benefit verbal recall of instruction sequences through the engagement of visuo-motor processes that provide additional forms of coding to support working memory performance.

Background Research suggests that children identified with impaired motor skills can respond well to intensive therapeutic interventions delivered via occupational and physical therapy services. There is, however, a need to explore alternative approaches to delivering interventions outside traditional referral‐based clinic settings because limited resources mean such health services often struggle to meet demand. This review sets out to systematically assess the evidence for and against school‐based interventions targeted at improving the motor skills of children aged between 3 and 12 years old. Method Five electronic databases were searched systematically (AMED, CINAHL, Cochrane, Medline, and PsycINFO) for peer‐reviewed articles published between January 2012 and July 2018. Studies were eligible if they implemented a school‐based motor skill intervention with a randomized or case‐controlled trial design that objectively measured motor skills as an outcome, which were not specific to an athletic or sporting skill. Participants had to be aged between 3 and 12 years old and free from neurological disorders known to affect muscle function. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results Twenty‐three studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies encompassed interventions targeted at training: fundamental movement skills, handwriting, fine, and global motor skills. The majority of these studies reported beneficial impact on motor function specifically, but some interventions also assessed subsequent impacts on activity and participation (but not well‐being). A number of the studies had methodological shortcomings that means these results need to be interpreted with caution. Conclusions Schools appear to be an effective setting for motor skill interventions, but the extent of benefit likely depends on the type of intervention. Moreover, confirmation is needed as to whether benefits extend beyond motor function into everyday activities, participation, and well‐being. Future research should include follow‐up measures to assess the longer term efficacy of school‐based interventions.