Cited by 162Children's Physical and Motor DevelopmentPhysical Education and PedagogyPhysical Education and Training Studies

Motor skills and school performance in children with daily physical education in school—A 9-year intervention study

Ericsson, I., Karlsson, M. K.·2014·Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports

Abstract

The aim was to study long-term effects on motor skills and school performance of increased physical education (PE). All pupils born 1990-1992 from one school were included in a longitudinal study over nine years. An intervention group (n = 129) achieved daily PE (5 × 45 min/week) and if needed one extra lesson of adapted motor training. The control group (n = 91) had PE two lessons/week. Motor skills were evaluated by the Motor Skills Development as Ground for Learning observation checklist and school achievements by marks in Swedish, English, Mathematics, and PE and proportion of pupils who qualified for upper secondary school. In school year 9 there were motor skills deficits in 7% of pupils in the intervention group compared to 47% in the control group (P < 0.001), 96% of the pupils in the intervention group compared to 89% in the control group (P < 0.05) qualified for upper secondary school. The sum of evaluated marks was higher among boys in the intervention group than in the control group (P < 0.05). The sum of marks was also higher in pupils with no motor skills deficit than among pupils with motor skills deficits (P < 0.01), as was the proportion of pupils who qualified for upper secondary school (97% vs 81%, P < 0.001). Daily PE and adapted motor skills training during the compulsory school years is a feasible way to improve not only motor skills but also school performance and the proportion of pupils who qualify for upper secondary school.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01458.x

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ericsson, I., & Karlsson, M. K.
Affiliations
  • Malmö University (SE)
  • Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Ericsson, I.
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-04-09
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
273-278
ISSN
  • 0905-7188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0838
OpenAlex
W1938100293
Cited by
162
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4
FWCI
9.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • Malmö University Publications (Malmö University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Lunds Universitet
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Children's Physical and Motor Development
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Physical Education and Pedagogy
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Physical Education and Training Studies
Keywords
daily physical education, motor skills, academic performance, compulsory school, long-term intervention, sex differences
MeSH terms
Achievement, Child, Educational Status, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Motor Skills, Physical Education and Training, Prospective Studies, School Admission Criteria, Sweden, Time Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review