Portable Touchscreen Assessment of Motor Skill: A Registered Report of the Reliability and Validity of EDNA MoTap.

Portable and flexible administration of manual dexterity assessments is necessary to monitor recovery from brain injury and the effects of interventions across clinic and home settings, especially when in-person testing is not possible or convenient. This paper aims to assess the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of a new suite of touchscreen-based manual dexterity tests (called EDNA™MoTap) that are designed for portable and efficient administration. A minimum sample of 49 healthy young adults will be conveniently recruited. The EDNA™MoTap tasks will be assessed for concurrent validity against standardized tools (the Box and Block Test [BBT] and the Purdue Pegboard Test) and for test-retest reliability over a 1- to 2-week interval. Correlation coefficients of r > .6 will indicate acceptable validity, and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values > .75 will indicate acceptable reliability for healthy adults. The sample were primarily right-handed (91%) adults aged 19 and 34 years (M = 24.93, SD = 4.21, 50% female). The MoTap tasks did not demonstrate acceptable validity, with tasks showing weak-to-moderate associations with the criterion assessments. Some outcomes demonstrated acceptable test-retest reliability; however, this was not consistent. Touchscreen-based assessments of dexterity remain relevant; however, there is a need for further development of the EDNA™MoTap task administration.

Locomotor-cognitive dual-tasking in children with developmental coordination disorder.

Introduction: Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) demonstrate deficits in predictive motor control and aspects of cognitive control compared with their typically developing (TD) peers. Adjustment to dynamic environments depends on both aspects of control and the deficits for children with DCD may constrain their ability to perform daily actions that involve dual-tasking. Under the assumption that motor-cognitive integration is compromised in children with DCD, we examined proportional dual-task costs using a novel locomotor-cognitive dual-task paradigm that enlisted augmented reality. We expect proportional dual-task performance costs to be greater for children with DCD compared to their TD peers. Methods: Participants were 34 children aged 6-12 years (16 TD, 18 DCD) who walked along a straight 12 m path under single- and dual-task conditions, the cognitive task being visual discrimination under simple or complex stimulus conditions presented via augmented reality. Dual-task performance was measured in two ways: first, proportional dual-task costs (pDTC) were computed for cognitive and gait outcomes and, second, within-trial costs (p-WTC) were measured as the difference on gait outcomes between pre- and post-stimulus presentation. Results: On measures of pDTC, TD children increased their double-limb support time when walking in response to a dual-task, while the children with DCD increased their locomotor velocity. On p-WTC, both groups increased their gait variability (step length and step width) when walking in response to a dual-task, of which the TD group had a larger proportional change than the DCD group. Greater pDTCs on motor rather than cognitive outcomes were consistent across groups and method of dual-task performance measurement. Discussion: Contrary to predictions, our results failed to support dramatic differences in locomotor-cognitive dual-task performance between children with DCD and TD, with both groups tending to priorities the cognitive over the motor task. Inclusion of a within-trial calculation of dual-task interference revealed an expectancy effect for both groups in relation to an impending visual stimulus. It is recommended that dual-task paradigms in the future continue to use augmented reality to present the cognitive task and consider motor tasks of sufficient complexity to probe the limits of performance in children with DCD.

The validity of raw custom-processed global navigation satellite systems data during straight-line sprinting across multiple days.

OBJECTIVES: (1) Determine the validity of instantaneous speed and acceleration and (2) the variation in validity over time (multiple sessions) for global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) devices. DESIGN: Repeated measures. METHODS: 10-Hz GNSS devices from Statsports (n = 2, Apex Pro) and Catapult (n = 2, Vector S7) were examined, whilst a speed laser manufactured by MuscleLab (n = 1, LaserSpeed) was the criterion measure, sampling at 2.56 kHz, with data exported at 1000 Hz. Ten participants completed 40 m sprinting and changes of pace on three separate days. Root mean square error (RMSE) was used to assess the magnitude and direction of the difference between GNSS and criterion measures (instantaneous speed, instantaneous acceleration). Linear mixed models were built to assess the difference in validity across days. RESULTS: RMSE ranged from 0.14 to 0.21 m·s-1 and 0.22 to 0.47 m·s-2 for speed and acceleration, respectively showing strong agreement. There were small variations in the agreement to criterion between days for both devices for speed (Catapult RMSE = 0.12 to 21 m·s-1; Statsports RMSE = 0.14 to 0.17 m·s-1) and for acceleration (Catapult RMSE = 0.26 to 0.47 m·s-2; Statsports RMSE = 0.22 to 0.43 m·s-2) across all movements. There was a negative linear relationship between speed and acceleration error as speed increased. CONCLUSIONS: Wearable microtechnology devices from Catapult (Vector S7) and Statsports (Apex Pro) have suitable validity when measuring instantaneous speed and acceleration across multiple days. There may be small variations during different sessions and over the speed spectrum.