Research and knowledge transfer priorities in developmental coordination disorder: Results from consultations with multiple stakeholders

Abstract

BackgroundPriority‐setting is a way to focus research and knowledge translation (KT) efforts for community‐based research partnerships (CBRP).ObjectiveTo identify the developmental coordination disorder (DCD) research and KT priorities of stakeholders in Quebec, Canada, and their perceptions regarding the implementation of a CBRP.DesignAn advisory committee oversaw the research process including an online survey and four community forums.Setting and participantsThe survey was posted online and four community forums were organized. Participants included parents of children with DCD, adults with DCD, health professionals and school staff.Main variablesStakeholder generated research and KT priorities, and optimal CBPR conditions.Outcome measuresParticipants selected their top five priorities based on a predefined list of 16 research and 12 KT priorities determined in collaboration with the advisory committee. They also rated the importance of various CBRP conditions. Preliminary survey results were discussed during the forums.ResultsSurvey participants (n = 395) identified interwoven research and KT priorities where access to services was considered to be essential: supporting children at school; improving DCD identification and diagnosis; preventing secondary consequences; improving the organization of services and implementing effective services. Forum participants (n = 52) confirmed the relevance of these priorities and supported the establishment of a CBRP inclusive of all stakeholders to improve DCD services, research and KT.Discussion and conclusionsA general consensus emerged among all groups, but adults with DCD were more concerned with employment than were the other stakeholder groups. These findings are presently being used to shape an ongoing, online CBRP.

The validity and reliability of observational assessment tools available to measure fundamental movement skills in school-age children: A systematic review

“…The growing lack of proficiency in children’s FMS is particularly disappointing as a recent systematic review of school-aged children found that FMS are consistently improved through training and interventions [ 13 ]. However, physiotherapists and occupational therapists are increasingly overwhelmed by the number of referrals for motor skill assessments [ 14 ], which has led to parental/guardian dissatisfaction with the services available to support children with motor skill difficulties [ 15 – 18 ]. The Chief Medical Officer has recommended the increased participation of schools in helping to reduce the burden on the National Health Service (NHS) in the UK [ 19 ].…”

Physical and emotional development of adolescents with low motor competence: Mothers’ perspectives

“…This highlights the importance of multi-disciplinary teams involving health professionals and parents to improve social and emotional functioning for adolescents with LMC and relieve some of the pressures mothers feel when assisting their adolescent. Similarly, Camden et al (2019) interviewed parents, health professionals and school staff in Canada working with children with LMC and found increasing services in school, improvements in the identification of the condition, preventing secondary consequences such as lower levels of participation in physical activity and better organised support services were vital to assist LMC. Kirby et al (2008) also suggested that those with LMC may need to continue to access support from professionals once they start attending tertiary education.…”

Developing and validating a school-based screening tool of Fundamental Movement Skills (FUNMOVES) using Rasch analysis

“…The issues detailed above are not limited to the UK, with international research showing dissatisfaction with services for children struggling with motor development [29][30][31][32]. There is therefore a need for resourceful solutions that enable systematic and efficient assessment of more children's FMS with greater regularity and less referral bias.…”