Measuring physical activity in children and youth living with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review.
No perfect activity monitor exists for kids with ID, so validate your tool before you stake treatment on it.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Aneke and the team hunted for a gold-standard tool to measure how much kids with intellectual disability move. They screened every paper they could find on step counters, heart-rate watches, and parent diaries. In the end they kept 17 studies that tested these tools in 5- to young learners with ID.
What they found
No tool passed the test. Most step counters under-counted because kids with ID shuffle or use walkers. Heart-rate belts were thrown off by meds that speed the pulse. Parent logs forgot short bursts of play. The review also confirmed these kids move far less than their typical peers.
How this fits with other research
Bartlo et al. (2011) looked at adults with ID and found clear health gains from exercise, but they used the same shaky monitors. The child/adult gap shows the tool problem spans ages.
Yuan et al. (2022) actually tracked Chinese kids with ID during lockdown and recorded only 10 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous activity per day. Their real numbers were possible because they accepted cheap pedometers despite the known errors, showing how researchers work around the gap Aneke exposed.
Venetsanou et al. (2011) ruled the M-ABC motor test "not gold" for kids with DCD; Aneke echoes the message for activity monitors in ID. Both papers warn BCBAs against trusting popular tools until better proof arrives.
Why it matters
Before you write a physical-activity goal, pick a monitor and test it yourself. Count steps by hand for ten minutes, then compare the device total. If it misses more than a large share, adjust the placement or try another brand and keep data for baseline only. Share your results so the field can finally build the gold standard these kids deserve.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Clip a pedometer on the client, count steps manually for 5 min, and note the percent error in your log.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Accurate assessment of physical activity is necessary in determining levels of physical activity in children living with intellectual disability (ID) and assessing effectiveness of intervention programmes. A systematic review of measures of physical activity in children with ID was undertaken using the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE-PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL Plus with Full Text and SPORT Discus (up to May 2012) databases were searched and articles were identified. The following inclusion criteria were used; articles in English which reported original research and measured physical activity levels in children with ID, and participants of school age (5-18 years). Searches were limited to articles from peer-reviewed journals and those available in full text. The search identified 5087 titles. Seventy-eight articles were retained for full review and 30 met the inclusion criteria. The review identified a clear deficiency in the number of validity and reliability studies of tools used to quantify physical activity in children with ID. Objective measurement of physical activity provided consistent results. Despite the differences in study design and methodological quality, there was agreement among studies that children with ID were significantly less active compared to children without disabilities. Refusal to wear instruments, movement limitations in children with ID, and positioning of devices were common issues. Future studies should focus on determining the validity and reliability of tools used to assess physical activity in children with ID.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2013 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2012.07.022