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

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.

Intra-Rater (Live vs. Video Assessment) and Inter-Rater (Expert vs. Novice) Reliability of the Test of Gross Motor Development—Third Edition

“…Hence, it becomes necessary to obtain pre-assessment agreements between raters or professionals who pretend to evaluate FMS in children. It has been suggested that more training may be necessary for those skills more difficult to assess and even that some of the criteria might be re-defined to make them more objective [ 10 , 20 , 31 , 34 , 36 ]; our results provide further support for this recommendation.…”

“…Besides, a recent systematic review about TGMD-2 and 3 reliability showed at least good-to-excellent ICC values for inter-rater reliability in both subscales and the overall score, higher than those obtained in this study. However, these differences might be regarding the methodology adopted or the statistical analysis used [ 20 ]. In the case of ICC, used in many studies, several aspects make it challenging to compare the results.…”

“…For example, regarding the scope of the present study, the evaluation of FMS by schoolteachers or clinical staff. In this sense, a current systematic review [ 20 ] of 23 studies assessing the reliability of the TGMD showed good-to-excellent inter-rater reliability, good-to-excellent intra-rater reliability and moderate-to-excellent test-retest reliability. Most studies assessed the reliability among experienced raters using video evaluation.…”

“…One of the most common assessments used to examine FMS in children is the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD) [ 3 ] and its variants TGMD—Second edition (TGMD-2) [ 18 ] and TGMD—Third Edition (TGMD-3) [ 19 ]. The TGMD-3 is a validated and reliable [ 20 ] process-oriented assessment applied to evaluate gross motor competence in children between 3 years-0 months and 10 years-11 months. The TGMD-3 assess thirteen FMS divide into two subscales, locomotor and ball skills.…”

Instrumentos para evaluar las habilidades motoras en niños con Trastorno del Espectro Autista entre 5 y 12 años: Revisión Sistemática (Instruments to assess motor skills in children with Autism Spectrum Disorder between 5 and 12 years old: Systematic Revi

“…Otro aspecto que puede condicionar el uso de estos instrumentos es la necesidad de contar con la presencia de una o varias personas durante su aplicación (Rey, Carballo-Fazanes, Varela-Casal, & Abelairas-Gómez, 2020), máxime si se trata de alumnado con TEA. Por ello, es importante que cuenten con «experiencia», con «conocimiento profundo de la materia» y con la «capacidad de identificar interrogantes, recoger y analizar Con los cuestionarios se mide la motricidad temprana y actual de los niños.…”