View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Effectiveness of a Fundamental Movement Skill Intervention in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Effectiveness of a Fundamental Movement Skill Intervention in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Language: English
Authors: Chien-Yu Pan (ORCID 0000-0001-8113-5350), Chia-Liang Tsai (ORCID 0000-0001-6173-2879), Fu-Chen Chen, Chih-Chia Chen, Yu-Han Hu, Chia-Hua Chu (ORCID 0000-0002-1598-8731)
Source: Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities. 2025 40(2):59-68.
Availability: SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 10
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Descriptors: Autism Spectrum Disorders, Males, Children, Psychomotor Skills, Intervention, Motor Development, Program Effectiveness, Foreign Countries, Urban Areas
Geographic Terms: Taiwan
DOI: 10.1177/10883576241311171
ISSN: 1088-3576
1538-4829
Abstract: This study examined the effect of a 12-week fundamental movement skills (FMS) intervention on the motor skills of 20 boys with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (ages 3-10 years) in an Asian country and whether the intervention effect would persist for at least 12 weeks after the intervention. In Part I, 10 boys with ASD (Group 1) received the intervention, whereas the remaining 10 boys with ASD (Group 2) did not (true control, no intervention). The arrangement was reversed in Part II. The main findings were that children in both the ASD groups exhibited significant improvements in the overall gross motor development and the locomotor and object control subtest scores after the intervention. The effectiveness appeared to be sustained for at least 12 weeks in Group 1. The study findings indicate the importance of including FMS programming as a part of the early intervention services delivered to young children with ASD.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2025
Accession Number: EJ1469367
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFtkITLvL_0kkG9S1w3fpF9AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDK6aM07D3t5tQf8nOgIBEICBm4QR8tC2ZcxN8mr6gmvMSrIHUpyYHeKuXfk-7TFDEmB4aMz5JSJN7SPTZSNu4VCbScZ7Qzfv1zsFcLMMzjdZJi_2kXmyIXo0UWTV3myhg9ZvqoNaBeGP2Wut0N-9lLRWA0pPFSjuIq0DvwwESNTWmU4w3XO9_SdSIXp1U9i7KRaDQ4AJd-PdjBCvTxp8ub8ErrNM2wDK06ypJk_H
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0184747607;fdd01jun.25;2025Apr29.02:55;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0184747607-1">Effectiveness of a Fundamental Movement Skill Intervention in Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial </title> <p>This study examined the effect of a 12-week fundamental movement skills (FMS) intervention on the motor skills of 20 boys with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (ages 3–10 years) in an Asian country and whether the intervention effect would persist for at least 12 weeks after the intervention. In Part I, 10 boys with ASD (Group 1) received the intervention, whereas the remaining 10 boys with ASD (Group 2) did not (true control, no intervention). The arrangement was reversed in Part II. The main findings were that children in both the ASD groups exhibited significant improvements in the overall gross motor development and the locomotor and object control subtest scores after the intervention. The effectiveness appeared to be sustained for at least 12 weeks in Group 1. The study findings indicate the importance of including FMS programming as a part of the early intervention services delivered to young children with ASD.</p> <p>Keywords: autism; motor development; intervention; fundamental movement skill; health</p> <p>Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a lifelong neurodevelopmental disorder that is characterized by substantial impairments in communication and social interactions as well as restricted and repetitive patterns of behaviors, interests, or activities ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref1">2</reflink>]). Along with social communicative and behavioral difficulties, many children with ASD experience considerable delays in their fundamental movement skills (FMS). These delays may become more pronounced with increasing age ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref2">1</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref3">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref4">19</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref5">20</reflink>]). Fundamental movement skill difficulties continuing into adolescence/adulthood may have negative impacts on the physical activity (PA) ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref6">30</reflink>]), physical fitness ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref7">29</reflink>]), daily living skills, and mental health of individuals with ASD ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref8">4</reflink>]). Moreover, low FMS levels may inhibit children with ASD from engaging in play, which may prevent them from reaping the developmental benefits provided by play, such as social interaction, communication, daily functioning, and behavioral skills ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref9">27</reflink>]). Less proficient FMS have also been found to be associated with increased levels of autism severity and poor social communicative skills ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref10">4</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref11">18</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref12">25</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref13">26</reflink>]). Because the mastery of FMS is considered essential for children's physical, cognitive, and social development as well as for promoting an active lifestyle ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref14">24</reflink>]), understanding the effectiveness of intervention strategies to improve FMS performance in children with ASD is crucial.</p> <p>Fundamental movement skills refer to basic movements, such as running, catching, and throwing, that are essential for a child's participation in a broad range of physical activities, including PA and sport engagement, physical education (PE) classes, active play, and daily life activities as well as for their overall health and development ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref15">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref16">32</reflink>]). Fundamental movement skills, sometimes also referred to as gross motor skills, form the basis for more advance, complex movements ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref17">22</reflink>]). These skills involve the use of large muscle groups and can be categorized into locomotor and object control/ball skills. Locomotor skills include movements such as running, hopping, galloping, and jumping, whereas object control/ball skills include movements such as striking, throwing, catching, and kicking ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref18">33</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref19">34</reflink>]). Fundamental movement skill proficiency enables children to engage in PA ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref20">23</reflink>]). According to motor development theory, the acquisition of motor skills requires learning and practicing those specific skills ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref21">28</reflink>]). Therefore, this study reviewed and analyzed only intervention studies that were focused on direct FMS-based instruction and that aimed to improve FMS and other gross motor skills in children with ASD.</p> <p>The purposes of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of a 12-week FMS-based intervention in two groups of children with ASD and whether the intervention effects would sustain in the primary group (i.e., Group 1) of children with ASD. We hypothesized the following: (a) FMS performance improves following the FMS-based instructional intervention in both groups of children with ASD, and (b) the intervention effect sustains for at least 12 weeks in the primary group of children with ASD.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-2">Method</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0184747607-3">Study Design</hd> <p>Ethical approval was received from a university research ethics committee for human behavioral sciences. All parents and children provided informed consent prior to participation in this study. This study employed a randomized controlled trial experimental design to test the effectiveness of the 12-week intervention in children with ASD. This study was divided into two 12-week parts. In the first part of the 12 weeks (Part I), children in Group 1 received the intervention, whereas Group 2 served as the control. In the second part of the 12 weeks (Part II), children with ASD in Group 2 received the intervention, whereas Group 1 served as the control. Moreover, during Part II of the study, whether the treatment effects were sustained was evaluated in children with ASD in Group 1.</p> <p>Prior to the intervention, all children were screened for eligibility and then paired on the basis of age, disability type, and comorbidity. They were then randomly assigned to either Group 1 (<emph>n</emph> = 10; primary grouping: pretest [Assessment 1], posttest [Assessment 2], and follow-up test [Assessment 3]) or Group 2 (<emph>n</emph> = 10; control grouping: Assessment 1 to Assessment 2; intervention condition, Assessment 2 to Assessment 3). Both groups received the same number of sessions and hours and underwent three FMS assessments.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-4">Participants</hd> <p>The study information was disseminated through various social service networks, including those of an autism society, a local clinical center, parent advocacy groups, and early intervention service providers, and through word of mouth in a large urban city in a developing Asian country with a high level of socioeconomic deprivation. To be included in this study, individuals were required to have a physician-confirmed diagnosis of ASD. Participants were required to provide written confirmation of their ASD diagnosis. In addition to the formal diagnoses by physicians, the traditional Chinese version of the Autism Behavior Checklist ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref22">17</reflink>]) and Social Responsiveness Scale-2 ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref23">11</reflink>]) were used to screen parental reports for autistic traits and autism and/or Asperger behaviors. A group of 20 boys with ASD ages 3 to 10 years participated in this study, and all participants completed the 12-week intervention and three measurements (i.e., pre, post, and follow-up). The demographic characteristics of the participants are listed in Table 1.</p> <p>Table 1. Descriptive Characteristics of Participants in the Fundamental Movement Skill Intervention.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="center">Characteristic</th><th align="center">Group 1 (<italic>n</italic> = 10)</th><th align="center">Group 2 (<italic>n</italic> = 10)</th><th align="center"><italic>t</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>p</italic></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Age (years)</td><td>6.35 ± 1.78</td><td>5.91 ± 1.87</td><td>0.53</td><td>.602</td></tr><tr><td>Height (cm)</td><td>119.93 ± 12.37</td><td>112.96 ± 11.21</td><td>1.68</td><td>.217</td></tr><tr><td>Weight (kg)</td><td>23.45 ± 6.87</td><td>21.49 ± 6.99</td><td>0.62</td><td>.542</td></tr><tr><td>BMI (kg/m2)</td><td>15.94 ± 1.84</td><td>16.49 ± 1.90</td><td>-0.65</td><td>.527</td></tr><tr><td>ABCT total raw score</td><td>20.50 ± 7.22</td><td>22.38 ± 5.71</td><td>-0.62</td><td>.546</td></tr><tr><td>SRS-2 total raw score</td><td>87.08 ± 14.65</td><td>100.50 ± 23.21</td><td>-1.59</td><td>.129</td></tr><tr><td colspan="5">Co-existing symptoms (<italic>n</italic>, %)</td></tr><tr><td>None</td><td>87.08 ± 14.65</td><td>9 (90.0%)</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>ADHD</td><td>1 (10.0%)</td><td>1 (10.0%)</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td colspan="5">Medication (<italic>n</italic>, %)</td></tr><tr><td>None</td><td>10 (100.0%)</td><td>10 (100.0%)</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>Yes</td><td>0 (0.0%)</td><td>0 (0.0%)</td><td /><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>1 <emph>Note.</emph> BMI = body mass index; ABCT = Autism Behavior Checklist–Taiwan version ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref24">17</reflink>]); SRS-2 = Social Responsiveness Scale–2–Chinese version ([<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref25">11</reflink>]); ADHD = attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-5">Intervention</hd> <p>The intervention consisted of 24 sessions that were conducted twice a week over 12 weeks of the 2020–2021 school year. The primary aim of the intervention was to teach and reinforce the 12 FMS included in Test of Gross Motor Development-2 (TGMD-2). The skills that were taught each week were as follows: Week 1, balance; Week 2, running; Week 3, underhand rolling and throwing; Week 4, galloping and leaping; Week 5, sliding; Week 6, vertical and horizontal jumping, hopping; Week 7, stationary dribbling/bouncing; Week 8, overhand throwing; Week 9, catching; Week 10, hopping; Week 11, kicking; and Week 12, striking a stationary ball. Balance skills were taught in the first week because it involves performing exercises that strengthen the muscles that help children stay upright, including the legs and core. Balance skill training can improve stability and prevent children from falling. These exercises were designed to be intense, challenging, and fun. For the best practice, the instruction was designed to focus on one core skill each week, with previously learned skills integrated into the sessions. For example, in the first week of the program, balance skills were taught on Day 1 and practiced on Day 2. On Day 1 in the second week, running was taught and then practiced on Day 2. Balance skills were practiced during warm-up and different activities in all lessons; consequently, the participants practiced these skills in every lesson. The same daily schedule was followed each week to teach the targeted skill of the week, and the targeted skills progressed in terms of difficulty throughout the intervention (i.e., starting with balance and ending with striking).</p> <p>All intervention sessions were conducted in a gymnasium in a large and public urban university in South Taiwan. Each session comprised six activities, namely warm-up (5 min), review of previously learned skills (15 min), instruction and practice of a new skill (Level I [10 min]), progression of a new skill (Level II [10 min]), progression of a new skill (Level III [10 min]), and cool-down (10 min). An example curriculum for the sliding skill is presented in Table 2. The participants practiced this curriculum for two intervention sessions in the fifth week. The sessions in the next week then focused on learning a new core skill while reviewing the sliding skill acquired in the previous two sessions.</p> <p>Table 2. Examples of a 60-Min Session Focusing on the Sliding Skill That Would Be Used in the Ninth Session.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="center">Activity</th><th align="center">Duration</th><th align="center">Skill</th><th align="center">Instructions</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1. Warm-up</td><td>5 min</td><td>Body awareness: hands and legs</td><td>Begin with the class's entry routine (e.g., sitting on the floor, singing the song, stretching, body rhythm, creative movement and games)</td></tr><tr><td>2. Review of previously learned skill</td><td>15 min</td><td>Galloping and leaping</td><td>Review rolling, galloping, and leaping by using the puzzle floor play mat</td></tr><tr><td>3. Introduction of new skill: Level I</td><td>10 min</td><td>Sliding: crab walking and two-legged standing slide while raising the arms to the side (i.e., crab imitation movement)</td><td>Instruct the participants to keep their right foot on the floor and step their left foot outward along the basketball court line so that their feet are slightly further than shoulder-width apart. Ask them to repeat this movement four times. Now, ask them to keep their left foot on the floor and step their right foot inward to return to the starting position. Encourage participants to raise both arms on either side of their body when they become familiar with the leg movements</td></tr><tr><td>4. Progression of new skill: Level II</td><td>10 min</td><td>Sliding: crab walking while maintaining a squat position and waving arms</td><td>Start with the same crab walking movement as above but ask participants to move while maintaining a squat position and with arms waving. Encourage the participants to bend their knees and wave their arms. Provide support if required but encourage them to walk on their own</td></tr><tr><td>5. Progression of new skill: Level III</td><td>10 min</td><td>Sliding: crab walking while maintaining a squat position, waving arms, and performing a squat jump</td><td>Start with the same crab walking movement as above but ask participants to move while maintaining a squat position and with arms waving. Encourage the participants to bend their knees and wave their arms. Provide support if required but encourage them to walk on their own</td></tr><tr><td>6. Cool-down</td><td>10 min</td><td>Slow walking/jogging/stretching, making comments and announcements</td><td>Ask the participants to sit on the floor and perform stretching exercises. While they are stretching, ask questions or make statements (either generally to all the participants or individually) related to the TGMD-2 performance criteria that were taught in class. Give participants a high-five as they leave and compliment something specific that each individual did well during the session</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>2 <emph>Note.</emph> TGMD-2 = Test of Gross Motor Development–2nd Edition (Ulrich, 2018).</p> <p>Each intervention session was conducted by the primary investigator with assistance from trained research assistants. The instructor-to-child ratio for each session was 1:2 or 1:1 depending on the attendance. The primary investigator has 19 years of teaching and research experience related to PA interventions for children with ASD. All research assistants were majoring in PE or adapted PE and had prior experience in working with children with ASD. The teaching strategies used in the present study are consistent with [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref26">6</reflink>] best practice guidelines for teaching physical activities to children with ASD, such as visual support (e.g., picture activity schedules) and short, verbal commands or pithy language (e.g., wait; watch Lin; your turn). Verbal instructions always involved single steps (e.g., "stand behind the line," "kick the ball," and "throw at the wall") to facilitate understanding among children with ASD. Additional physical prompts were provided to participants to help them understand how to perform the skills. Verbal praise and encouragement were provided to all participants throughout the sessions, with an increased emphasis on the process (e.g., hip and shoulder rotation during a swing) rather than the product (e.g., dribbling the ball four times). After each session, each research assistant provided detailed explanations to the parents regarding the skills that were taught on that day, activities to practice the skills, and tips on how to perform them at home and in the community. A more detailed training manual is available on request from the primary investigator.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-6">Outcome Variables</hd> <p>The FMS was assessed using TGMD-2 ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref27">33</reflink>]). The TGMD-2 is considered a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of FMS and has been used in children with ASD ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref28">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref29">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref30">15</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref31">16</reflink>]). The TGMD-2 enables the norm-referenced and criterion-referenced assessment of six locomotor skills (running, galloping, hopping, leaping, horizontal jumping, and sliding) and six object control skills (striking a stationary ball, stationary dribbling, catching, kicking, overhand throwing, and underhand rolling) in children ages 3 to 10 years. Each skill is evaluated according to 3 to 5 specific performance criteria. The children were filmed during the assessment to enable further analysis. The scores were calculated for each subtest (locomotion and object control) according to the age and sex of the child and were considered standard scores that were converted into Gross Motor Development Quotient (GMDQ), with reference values of 100 ± 15 ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref32">33</reflink>]). The GMDQ and raw scores obtained in the locomotor and object control subtests were used as the dependent measures in this study.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-7">Data Analysis</hd> <p>The effects of the FMS intervention were assessed through analysis of variance (ANOVA) with a 2 (Assessment: 1 vs. 2) × 2 (Group: 1 vs. 2) mixed-model factorial design for TGMD-2 outcomes. To determine whether differences between groups or assessments were significant, post hoc comparisons of adjusted means were conducted with Bonferroni corrections. Simple main effect tests were conducted as follow-up tests to detect significant interaction effects. The effect size was computed and reported as η<sups>2</sups> in ANOVA. Separate ANOVAs were conducted for the six locomotor skills and the six object control skills to examine any differences among individual movement skills. Furthermore, paired <emph>t</emph> tests were performed to examine the FMS intervention effect in Group 2 (Assessment 2 vs. Assessment 3) and the potential for a sustained FMS intervention effect in Group 1 (Assessment 2 vs. Assessment 3). The effect size was computed and reported as Cohen's <emph>d</emph> for the paired <emph>t</emph> tests. All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 25 ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref33">13</reflink>]), and an alpha level of.05 was used to indicate statistical significance.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-8">Results</hd> <p>Descriptive statistics of the participants' FMS are listed in Table 3. No significant differences were noted between the two groups in terms of demographic variables (Table 1) and outcome variables (Table 3) in Assessment 1, indicating successful randomization.</p> <p>Table 3. Fundamental Movement Skills by Group at Three Assessments.</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="left" rowspan="2">Skill</th><th align="center" colspan="2">Assessment 1</th><th align="center" colspan="3">Group 1 (<italic>n</italic> = 10)</th><th align="center" colspan="3">Group 2 (<italic>n</italic> = 10)</th></tr><tr><th align="center"><italic>t</italic></th><th align="center"><italic>p</italic></th><th align="center">Assessment 1</th><th align="center">Assessment 2</th><th align="center">Assessment 3</th><th align="center">Assessment 1</th><th align="center">Assessment 2</th><th align="center">Assessment 3</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>GMDQ</td><td>-1.11</td><td>.283</td><td>89.25 ± 13.92</td><td>103.25 ± 14.55</td><td>100.83 ± 16.29</td><td>96.25 ± 13.77</td><td>98.13 ± 16.03</td><td>105.25 ± 15.94</td></tr><tr><td>Locomotor skills</td><td>-0.32</td><td>.757</td><td>32.33 ± 7.00</td><td>39.58 ± 5.99</td><td>41.17 ± 4.75</td><td>33.38 ± 7.63</td><td>35.63 ± 7.76</td><td>40.63 ± 6.35</td></tr><tr><td>Run</td><td>0.58</td><td>.571</td><td>5.92 ± 1.44</td><td>7.33 ± 1.50</td><td>7.75 ± 0.62</td><td>5.50 ± 1.77</td><td>6.25 ± 1.67</td><td>7.13 ± 1.25</td></tr><tr><td>Gallop</td><td>-0.13</td><td>.898</td><td>5.17 ± 1.40</td><td>6.33 ± 1.37</td><td>6.42 ± 1.38</td><td>5.25 ± 1.39</td><td>5.25 ± 1.49</td><td>6.63 ± 1.41</td></tr><tr><td>Hop</td><td>-0.91</td><td>.377</td><td>4.92 ± 1.56</td><td>6.33 ± 2.06</td><td>7.00 ± 2.30</td><td>5.63 ± 1.92</td><td>6.25 ± 1.91</td><td>7.50 ± 2.00</td></tr><tr><td>Leap</td><td>-0.35</td><td>.729</td><td>5.50 ± 0.80</td><td>5.92 ± 0.29</td><td>5.83 ± 0.58</td><td>5.63 ± 0.74</td><td>5.88 ± 0.35</td><td>6.00 ± 0.00</td></tr><tr><td>Jump</td><td>-0.61</td><td>.547</td><td>4.67 ± 2.06</td><td>6.67 ± 1.37</td><td>6.83 ± 1.53</td><td>5.25 ± 2.12</td><td>5.88 ± 1.25</td><td>6.63 ± 1.41</td></tr><tr><td>Slide</td><td>0.05</td><td>.957</td><td>6.17 ± 1.27</td><td>7.00 ± 1.54</td><td>7.33 ± 1.37</td><td>6.13 ± 2.17</td><td>6.13 ± 2.23</td><td>6.75 ± 2.43</td></tr><tr><td>Object control</td><td>-0.3</td><td>.769</td><td>29.00 ± 10.45</td><td>36.17 ± 9.01</td><td>36.75 ± 7.19</td><td>30.38 ± 9.53</td><td>31.25 ± 8.80</td><td>37.38 ± 8.81</td></tr><tr><td>Striking</td><td>0.53</td><td>.6</td><td>6.83 ± 1.47</td><td>8.08± 1.68</td><td>8.00 ± 1.81</td><td>6.38 ± 2.39</td><td>6.75 ± 2.05</td><td>7.63 ± 2.07</td></tr><tr><td>Dribble</td><td>0.52</td><td>.608</td><td>3.67 ± 2.81</td><td>4.58 ± 2.64</td><td>5.00 ± 1.91</td><td>3.00 ± 2.78</td><td>2.50 ± 2.00</td><td>4.63 ± 2.56</td></tr><tr><td>Catch</td><td>-0.32</td><td>.75</td><td>4.00 ± 1.54</td><td>5.17 ± 1.11</td><td>5.17 ± 0.83</td><td>4.25 ± 1.91</td><td>4.50 ± 2.00</td><td>5.38 ± 1.41</td></tr><tr><td>Kick</td><td>-1.92</td><td>.07</td><td>4.83 ± 1.90</td><td>5.92 ± 1.68</td><td>6.50 ± 1.17</td><td>6.38 ± 1.51</td><td>6.38 ± 1.41</td><td>6.88 ± 0.99</td></tr><tr><td>Throw</td><td>-0.94</td><td>.361</td><td>4.42 ± 2.19</td><td>5.67 ± 2.57</td><td>5.58 ± 3.00</td><td>5.25 ± 1.49</td><td>5.63 ± 1.30</td><td>6.63 ± 1.30</td></tr><tr><td>Roll</td><td>0.15</td><td>.88</td><td>5.25 ± 2.01</td><td>6.75 ± 1.36</td><td>6.50 ± 1.45</td><td>5.13 ± 1.36</td><td>5.50 ± 1.20</td><td>6.25 ± 1.49</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 <emph>Note.</emph> GMDQ = Gross Motor Development Quotient.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-9">Part I (Assessment 1–Assessment 2)</hd> <p>The results of the ANOVA revealed significant main effects of the assessment of the GMDQ, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref34">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 19.12, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.40; locomotor subtest, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref35">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 30.73, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.54; and object control subtest, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref36">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 15.08, <emph>p</emph> =.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.36. Regarding individual movement skills, significant main effects of assessment were observed for running, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref37">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 13.34, <emph>p</emph> =.002, η<sups>2</sups> =.41; galloping, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref38">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 12.17, <emph>p</emph> =.003, η<sups>2</sups> =.29; hopping, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref39">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 8.42, <emph>p</emph> =.010, η<sups>2</sups> =.30; horizontal jumping, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref40">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 23.01, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.49; sliding, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref41">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 6.21, <emph>p</emph> =.023, η<sups>2</sups> =.20; striking, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref42">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 7.57, <emph>p</emph> =.013, η<sups>2</sups> =.27; catching, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref43">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 18.92, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.42; kicking, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref44">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 4.85, <emph>p</emph> =.041, η<sups>2</sups> =.18; overhand throwing, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref45">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 7.10, <emph>p</emph> =.016, η<sups>2</sups> =.26; and underhand rolling, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref46">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 14.55, <emph>p</emph> =.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.39 (Table 4). These scores were significantly higher after the intervention (Assessment 2) than before the intervention (Assessment 1). No significant between-group differences were found in any of the TGMD-2 scores. Significant interaction effects were observed for the GMDQ, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref47">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 11.15, <emph>p</emph> =.004, η<sups>2</sups> =.23, and both the TGMD-2 subtests (locomotor: <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref48">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 8.51, <emph>p</emph> =.009, η<sups>2</sups> =.15; object control: <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref49">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 9.23, <emph>p</emph> =.007, η<sups>2</sups> = 0.22). Regarding individual movement skills, significant interaction effects were observed for galloping, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref50">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 12.17, <emph>p</emph> =.003, η<sups>2</sups> =.29; horizontal jumping, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref51">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 6.31, <emph>p</emph> =.022, η<sups>2</sups> =.13; sliding, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref52">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 6.21, <emph>p</emph> =.023, η<sups>2</sups> =.20; dribbling, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref53">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 7.57, <emph>p</emph> =.013, η<sups>2</sups> =.29; catching, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref54">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 7.92, <emph>p</emph> =.011, η<sups>2</sups> =.18; kicking, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref55">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 4.85, <emph>p</emph> =.041, η<sups>2</sups> =.18; and underhand rolling, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref56">1</reflink>, 18)</subs> = 5.24, <emph>p</emph> =.034, η<sups>2</sups> =.14.</p> <p>Table 4. Summary of Analyses From Two-Way ANOVA (Group × Assessment) With Repeated Measures on One Factor (Assessment).</p> <p>Graph</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><colgroup><col align="left" /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /><col align="char" char="." /></colgroup><thead><tr><th align="center">Skill</th><th align="center">Group</th><th align="center">1</th><th align="center">2</th><th align="center">Assessment</th><th align="center">1</th><th align="center">2</th><th align="center">Interactions(<italic>p</italic> <.05)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>GMDQ</td><td>0.885</td><td>96.25 ± 4.03</td><td>97.19 ± 4.94</td><td><.001<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>92.75 ± 3.25</td><td>100.69 ± 3.46</td><td>.004<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Locomotor skills</td><td>0.641</td><td>35.96 ± 1.95</td><td>34.50 ± 2.38</td><td><bold><.001</bold><xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>32.85 ± 1.66</td><td>37.60 ± 1.54</td><td>.009<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Run</td><td>0.266</td><td>6.63 ± 0.41</td><td>5.88 ± 0.51</td><td>.002<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>5.71 ± 0.36</td><td>6.79 ± 0.36</td><td>.276</td></tr><tr><td>Gallop</td><td>0.431</td><td>5.75 ± 0.39</td><td>5.25 ± 0.48</td><td>.003<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>5.21 ± 0.32</td><td>5.79 ± 0.32</td><td>.003<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Hop</td><td>0.691</td><td>5.63 ± 0.49</td><td>5.94 ± 0.60</td><td>.010<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>5.27 ± 0.39</td><td>6.29 ± 0.46</td><td>.275</td></tr><tr><td>Leap</td><td>0.843</td><td>5.71 ± 0.13</td><td>5.75 ± 0.16</td><td>.071</td><td>5.56 ± 0.18</td><td>5.90 ± 0.07</td><td>.637</td></tr><tr><td>Horizontal jump</td><td>0.891</td><td>5.67 ± 0.47</td><td>5.56 ± 0.58</td><td><.001<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>4.96 ± 0.48</td><td>6.27 ± 0.30</td><td>.022<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Slide</td><td>0.567</td><td>6.58 ± 0.50</td><td>6.13 ± 0.61</td><td>.023<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>6.15 ± 0.38</td><td>6.56 ± 0.42</td><td>.023<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Object control</td><td>0.68</td><td>32.58 ± 2.67</td><td>30.81 ± 3.27</td><td>.001<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>29.69 ± 2.31</td><td>33.71 ± 2.04</td><td>.007<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Striking</td><td>0.274</td><td>7.46 ± 0.50</td><td>6.56 ± 0.62</td><td>.013<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>6.60 ± 0.43</td><td>7.42 ± 0.42</td><td>.156</td></tr><tr><td>Dribble</td><td>0.253</td><td>4.13 ± 0.74</td><td>2.75 ± 0.90</td><td>.429</td><td>3.33 ± 0.64</td><td>3.54 ± 0.55</td><td>.013<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Catch</td><td>0.774</td><td>4.58 ± 0.45</td><td>4.38 ± 0.56</td><td><.001<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>4.13 ± 0.39</td><td>4.83 ± 0.35</td><td>.011<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Kick</td><td>0.182</td><td>5.38 ± 0.46</td><td>6.38 ± 0.56</td><td>.041<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>5.60 ± 0.40</td><td>6.15 ± 0.36</td><td>.041<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td></tr><tr><td>Overhand throw</td><td>0.662</td><td>5.04 ± 0.56</td><td>5.44 ± 0.69</td><td>.016<xref ref-type="table-fn" rid="tfn5">*</xref></td><td>4.83 ± 0.45</td><td>5.65 ± 0.50</td><td>.168</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <ulist> <item>4 <emph>Note.</emph> GMDQ = Gross Motor Development Quotient; <emph>M</emph> ± <emph>SE</emph> (standard error).</item> <item>5 <emph>p</emph> <.05, bolded.</item> </ulist> <p>As shown in Figures 1 to 3, follow-up assessment of the simple main effects revealed that the underhand rolling skill significantly improved in Group 1 after the FMS intervention compared with Group 2 (+1.25, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref57">1</reflink>, 19)</subs> = 4.46, <emph>p</emph> =.049, η<sups>2</sups> =.20). Moreover, Group 1 exhibited significantly higher scores after the intervention compared with baseline (GMDQ: +14.00, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref58">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 44.45, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.80; locomotor subtest: +7.25, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref59">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 35.72, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.76; object control subtest: +7.17, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref60">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 29.01, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.73; running: +1.42, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref61">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 11.56, <emph>p</emph> =.006, η<sups>2</sups> =.51; galloping: +1.17, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref62">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 23.44, <emph>p</emph> =.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.68; horizontal jumping: +2.00, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref63">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 33.00, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.75; sliding: +0.83, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref64">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 16.18, <emph>p</emph> =.002, η<sups>2</sups> =.75; dribbling: +0.92, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref65">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 7.44, <emph>p</emph> =.020, η<sups>2</sups> =.40; catching: +1.17, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref66">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 31.71, <emph>p</emph> <.001, η<sups>2</sups> =.74; kicking: +1.08, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref67">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 17.37, <emph>p</emph> =.002, η<sups>2</sups> =.61; underhand rolling: +1.50, <emph>F</emph><subs>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref68">1</reflink>, 9)</subs> = 15.63, <emph>p</emph> =.002, η<sups>2</sups> =.59). However, no significant improvement in any outcome variable was found in Group 2 at Assessment 2 than at Assessment 1.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. The Gross Motor Development Quotient (GMDQ) and Raw Scores of Locomotor (LM) and Object Control (OC) Subtests for Two Groups of Children With ASD Before (Pretest) and After the Intervention (Posttest)* p <.05.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 2. The Raw Score of Individual Locomotor Skill for Two Groups of Children With ASD Before (Pretest) and After the Intervention (Posttest).* p <.05.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 3. The Raw Score of Individual Object Control Skill for Two Groups of Children With ASD Before (Pretest) and After the Intervention (Posttest).* p <.05.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-10">Part II (Assessment 2–Assessment 3)</hd> <p>For Group 2, significant differences were noted between Assessment 2 and Assessment 3 (i.e., intervention condition) in GMDQ (+7.13, <emph>t</emph> = 3.15, <emph>p</emph> =.016, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.45), locomotor subtest scores (+5.00, <emph>t</emph> = 4.54, <emph>p</emph> =.003, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.71), and object control subtest scores (+6.13, <emph>t</emph> = 3.76, <emph>p</emph> =.007, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.70) as well as two individual locomotor skills (i.e., running: +0.88, <emph>t</emph> = 2.50, <emph>p</emph> =.041, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.70; galloping: +1.38, <emph>t</emph> = 4.25, <emph>p</emph> =.004, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.95) and three individual object control skills (i.e., dribbling: +2.13, <emph>t</emph> = 3.33, <emph>p</emph> =.013, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.93); overhand throwing: +1.00, <emph>t</emph> = 5.29, <emph>p</emph> =.001, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.77; underhand rolling: +0.75, <emph>t</emph> = 2.39, <emph>p</emph> =.048, Cohen's <emph>d</emph> = 0.55), indicating a greater improvement in scores after the FMS intervention. For Group 1, the comparison between Assessment 2 and Assessment 3 (i.e., follow-up assessment) revealed no significant difference in any of the TGMD-2 scores, suggesting that the positive effects of the FMS intervention were sustained over time.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-11">Discussion</hd> <p>Consistent with previous intervention studies ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref69">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref70">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref71">15</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref72">16</reflink>]), which have demonstrated improvements in FMS proficiency after an FMS training program, in this study, children with ASD exhibited improvements in the overall GMDQ and locomotor and object control subtest scores immediately after the intervention (i.e., at Assessment 2 for Group 1 and at Assessment 3 for Group 2). Moreover, these improvements were still evident 12 weeks after the intervention (i.e., at Assessment 3 for Group 1). These findings indicate that the FMS intervention effectively improved the FMS proficiency of children with ASD, and the effects were sustained for at least 12 weeks. The current study referenced the FMS intervention results of [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref73">8</reflink>] and provided FMS-based instruction to children with ASD through research-supported strategies implemented by two moderators. The results of the meta-analysis of [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref74">8</reflink>] indicated that interventions lasting ≥16 hr had a significantly larger effect than those lasting <16 hr, highlighting that the intensity of an effective intervention is an important contributing factor to positive outcomes. In addition, the interventions implemented in experimental or research settings had significantly larger effects than those implemented in practical or service settings. The greater control and more focused research objectives, specific alignment between the research objectives and outcome measures, methods of participant recruitment, and participant exclusion criteria related to behavioral characteristics involved in experimental or research-based interventions may have contributed to these results. Practitioners and researchers should consider designing interventions lasting at least 16 hr in total to ensure the maximum impact of the intervention on gross motor skills and targeted specific goals. In addition, future studies should consider the generalization of skills into a free-play, unstructured activity setting because such environments are conducive to the development of most of these skills.</p> <p>The TGMD-2 scores indicated improvements in many individual test items from Assessment 1 to Assessment 2 in Group 1 (i.e., galloping, jumping, sliding, dribbling, catching, kicking, and rolling) and from Assessment 2 to Assessment 3 in Group 2 (i.e., running, galloping, dribbling, throwing, and rolling). Locomotor skills are the primary parts of the daily movements and are commonly practiced in the daily living environment (e.g., jumping over an obstacle, running up and down the stairs). Object control skills are more difficult to train because of its greater complexity relative to locomotor skills ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref75">21</reflink>]). Findings of the present study supported the teaching strategies used in the present study ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref76">6</reflink>]) and showed its effectiveness in managing such difficulty in object control skills training to children with ASD. These skills are commonly applied in games and physical activities that children engage in during recess, PE, and leisure time. Therefore, improvements in these skills can be considered developmentally important and appropriate. According to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health model ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref77">35</reflink>]), improvements in motor skill proficiency may positively influence the activity and participation of children with and without disabilities. In a previous study, children with autism-like characteristics were observed to engage in more physically active play with their peers during recess after the school-based FMS intervention ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref78">5</reflink>]). In addition, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref79">7</reflink>] demonstrated that FMS training effectively increased the PA of children with disabilities on weekends. They indicated that the weekend activities of children are possibly less structured and more dependent on movement patterns compared with weekday activities. Therefore, the improvements in these skills of the present participants may enable them to engage more frequently and fully in physical activities with their typically developing (TD) peers at school and in community, both during weekdays and on weekends. Given the role of PA in overall development and well-being of children with ASD, further research is needed to comprehensively explore the effects of FMS programs on promoting activity participation in this group of children.</p> <p>The improvement in the participants' FMS performance may have important implications for their overall social communicative functioning through their increased participation in physical activities. [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref80">25</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref81">26</reflink>]) demonstrated that children with ASD who have better FMS proficiency, especially object control skills, tend to have better social communicative skills and exhibit fewer autistic symptoms. The significant improvements in many object control skills, such as overhand throwing, kicking, underhand rolling, dribbling, and catching, in the current study may enable the participants to engage in more games and activities with their peers, potentially providing more opportunities to practice their social and communicative skills, which may ultimately contribute to successful inclusion at school and in the community. [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref82">31</reflink>] implemented a school-based inclusive FMS program for children ages 6 to 11 years with ASD and their TD peers, and the results indicated positive changes in the social and communication skills of the children with ASD as well as improved attitudes of the TD children toward the children with ASD. Both the groups exhibited significant improvements in FMS after the intervention. The authors suggested that the improved FMS may have increased the opportunity for active play in an inclusive environment, which may have contributed to the improvements in social skills among children with ASD, mutual understanding and acceptance, and improved peer attitudes toward ASD ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref83">31</reflink>]). In a SPARK dataset analysis, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref84">4</reflink>] confirmed that motor performance (fine motor and general motor competence skills) was a predictor of social communication skills, repetitive behavior severity, and language and functional delays. Compared with fine motor and general motor competence skills, gross motor skills were a more effective predictor of social communication delay. Therefore, improving the FMS of young children with ASD through early interventions may increase their opportunities for social communicative interactions (e.g., recess or playground play) throughout childhood. Future studies should include a group of TD children to better understand the implications of an FMS intervention on the social skills of children with ASD and changes in peer attitudes of children without disabilities.</p> <p>An important element of any effective program is whether the skills that are learned can be transferred to environments outside of the intervention. In the present study, FMS improvements observed in Assessment 2 persisted to the 12-week follow-up in Group 1. The improvement in FMS may be because the participants were exposed to the same picture activity schedules, verbal cues, and demonstrations used in the assessment multiple times during the intervention, which may have helped them understand the skills better and retain them over time. It may also be partly attributed to the low ratio of instructors to participants in the intervention, which may have provided intensive and supportive opportunities for skill practice. Furthermore, it is imperative to not only improve motor skills but also ensure that these improvements are sustained beyond the intervention and can be applied in PE classes, recess, and other physical activities at school and in the community. Skill retention is an essential element of program effectiveness. The results of the present study suggest that the FMS intervention applied successfully facilitated the transfer of skills to other environments for these children. Empirical research suggests that the development of FMS does not occur automatically, but requires instruction and practice in early school years ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref85">3</reflink>]). The development of motor skills is a complex process and involves the interaction between the individual's biological constraints (e.g., the central nervous system, sensory system, muscles, and skeleton) and the environment ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref86">9</reflink>]). Skill acquisition is a cumulative process that is based on previous experiences. Without sufficient opportunities and appropriate instruction to participate in and practice FMS experiences, movement patterns that are used less frequently may not become stable and may be eliminated through a process known as developmental pruning. Fundamental movement skill interventions are considered the building blocks for future motor skill development, including sport-specific movements and motor skillfulness ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref87">9</reflink>]). Embedding motor behavior within early childhood interventions can provide young children multiple opportunities to acquire and refine their FMS. These opportunities over time will help accumulate the FMS, thereby maximizing their learning of additional motor skills and allowing them to progress toward achieving motor skillfulness.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-12">Limitations</hd> <p>This study has various limitations. First, the sample size of this study was small, which limits the generalizability of the results to a larger population of children with ASD. In addition, the participants in this study may have had a higher socioeconomic status and more motivated parents than the children with ASD in other geographical areas. Furthermore, studies on ASD have been mainly conducted among boys; thus, future studies should include both boys and girls to achieve a more diverse sample. Other limitations including family reports were not collected with regard to their uses of practice activities at home during and following the 12-week intervention as well as different type or level of daily activities for their child following intervention and their improved FMS.</p> <hd id="AN0184747607-13">Conclusion</hd> <p>In conclusion, the current FMS intervention effectively improved the overall gross motor development and locomotor and object control subtest scores of children with ASD, and these improvements were sustained for at least 12 weeks. The FMS intervention in this study incorporated individualized instruction, demonstration, and personalized feedback and utilized various visual, verbal, and manual cues as well as picture activity schedules to enhance learning. The application of these instructional techniques significantly improved FMS performance, as measured using TGMD-2. Future researchers and practitioners should consider improving the efficiency of the intervention by shifting to small groups rather than 1:2 or 1:1 instructor-to-child ratio, with program emphasizing inclusive approaches in larger and more diverse group FMS training.</p> <p>The authors wish to thank all the participants who participated in this study and the research assistants who helped with data collection and other contributions.</p> <ref id="AN0184747607-14"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref2" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref1" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> This research was supported by the Taiwan National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), previously known as Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), under grant numbers MOST 106-2410-H-017-022-MY3 and NSTC 112-2410-H-017-029-MY2.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref85" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Chien-Yu Pan</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8113-5350 Chia-Liang Tsai</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext>Graph</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref8" type="bt"></bibl> <bibtext>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6173-2879 Chia-Hua Chu</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref28" type="bt"></bibl> <bibtext>Graph https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1598-8731</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chih-Chia Chen is now affiliated with University of Iowa, Iowa, IA, USA.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0184747607-15"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Allen K. A., Bredero B., Van Damme T., Ulrich D. A., Simons J. (2017). Test of Gross Motor Development-3 (TGMD-3) with the use of visual supports for children with autism spectrum disorder: Validity and reliability. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47(3), 813–833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-016-3005-0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Barela J. A. (2013). Fundamental motor skill proficiency is necessary for children's motor activity inclusion. Motriz Revista de Educação Física, 19(3), 548–551. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-65742013000300003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bhat A. (2023). Multidimensional motor performance in children with autism mostly remains stable with age and predicts social communication delay, language delay, functional delay, and repetitive behavior severity after accounting for intellectual disability or cognitive delay: A SPARK dataset analysis. Autism Research, 16(1), 208–229. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.2870</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bremer E., Lloyd M. (2016). School-based fundamental motor skill intervention for children with autism-like characteristics: An exploratory study. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 33(1), 66–88. https://doi.org/10.1123/APAQ.2015-0009</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref26" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Breslin C. M., Liu T. (2015). Do you know what I'm saying? Strategies to assess motor skills for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 86(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2014.978419</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref79" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Capio C. M., Sit C. H. P., Eguia K. F., Abernethy B., Masters R. S. W. (2015). Fundamental movement skills training to promote physical activity in children with and without disability: A pilot study. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 4(3), 235–243. https://doi.org/2010.1016/j.jshs.2014.08.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref73" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Case L., Yun J. (2019). The effect of different intervention approaches on gross motor outcomes of children with autism spectrum disorder: A meta-analysis. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 36(4), 501–526. https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.2018-0174</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref86" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Clark J. E. (2007). On the problem of motor skill development. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 78(5), 39–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2007.10598023</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Constantino J. N., Gruber C. P. (2012). Social Responsiveness Scale (2nd ed.). Western Psychological Services.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gau S. S.-F., Liu L.-T., Wu Y.-Y., Chiu Y.-N., Tsai W.-C. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Social Responsiveness Scale. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7(2), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2012.10.004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Henderson H., Fuller A., Noren S., Mortensen Stout V., Williams D. (2016). The effects of a physical education program on the motor skill performance of children with autism spectrum disorder. Palaestra, 30(3), 41–50.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> IBM Corporation. (2015). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows. [computer software]</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kaur M., Srinivasana S. M., Bhata A. N. (2018). Comparing motor performance, praxis, coordination, and interpersonal synchrony between children with and without Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Research in Developmental Disabilities, 72(2018), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2017.10.025</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ketcheson L., Hauck J., Ulrich D. (2017). The effects of an early motor skill intervention on motor skills, levels of physical activity, and socialization in young children with autism spectrum disorder: A pilot study. Autism, 21(4), 481–492. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361316650611</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ketcheson L., Staples K., Pitchford E. A., Loetzner F. (2023). Promoting positive health outcomes in an urban community-based physical activity intervention for preschool aged children on the autism spectrum. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 53(2), 633–647. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-04871-7</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Krug D. A., Arick J. R., Almond P. J. (2008). Autism Behavior Checklist-Taiwan Version (ABCT) (Wu Y. Y., Huang G. Y., Trans.). Pro-Ed.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leonard H. C., Hill E. L. (2014). The impact of motor development on typical and atypical social cognition and language: A systematic review. Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 19(3), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/camh.12055</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liu T., Breslin C. M. (2013). Fine and gross motor performance of the MABC-2 by children with autism spectrum disorder and typically developing children. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7(10), 1244–1249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rasd.2013.07.002</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lloyd M., MacDonald M., Lord C. (2013). Motor skills of toddlers with autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 17(2), 133–146.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Logan S., Robinson L. E., Wilson A. E., Lucas W. A. (2012). Getting the fundamentals of movement: A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of motor skill interventions in children. Child: Care, Health and Development, 38(3), 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01307.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Logan S. W., Ross S. M., Chee K., Stodden D. F., Robinson L. E. (2017). Fundamental motor skills: A systematic review of terminology. Journal of Sports Sciences, 36(7), 781–796. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2017.1340660</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Logan S. W., Webster E. K., Getchell N., Pfeiffer K. A., Robinson L. E. (2015). Relationship between fundamental motor skill competence and physical activity during childhood and adolescence: A systematic review. Kinesiology Review, 4(4), 416–426. https://doi.org/10.1123/kr.2013-0012</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lubans D. R., Morgan P. J., Cliff D. P., Barnett L. M., Okely A. D. (2010). Fundamental movement skills in children and adolescents: Review of associated health benefits. Sports Medicine, 40(12), 1019–1035. https://doi.org/10.2165/11536850-000000000-00000</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MacDonald M., Lord C., Ulrich D. A. (2013). The relationship of motor skills and social communicative skills in school-aged children with autism spectrum disorder. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 30(3), 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.30.3.271</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> MacDonald M., Lord C., Ulrich D. A. (2014). Motor skills and calibrated autism severity in young children with autism spectrum disorder. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 31(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1123/apaq.2013-0068</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Neijs L. D., Tisseur C., Kluwen L. A., van Berckelaer-Onnes I. A., Swaab H., Ester W. A. (2023). Effectivity of play-based interventions in children with autism spectrum disorder and their parents: A systematic review. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 53(4), 1588–1617. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-021-05357-2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Newell K. M. (1991). Motor skill acquisition. Annual Review of Psychology, 42(1991), 213–237. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.42.020191.001241</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pan C. Y. (2014). Motor proficiency and physical fitness in adolescent males with and without autism spectrum disorders. Autism, 18(2), 156–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361312458597</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Robinson L. E., Stodden D. F., Barnett L. M., Lopes V. P., Logan S. W., Rodrigues L. P., D'Hondt E. (2015). Motor competence and its effect on positive developmental trajectories of health. Sports Medicine, 45(9), 1273–1284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0351-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sansi A., Nalbant S., Ozer D. (2021). Effects of an inclusive physical activity program on the motor skills, social skills and attitudes of students with and without autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 51(7), 2254–2270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04693-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stodden D. F., Goodway J. D., Langendorfer S. J., Roberton M. A., Rudisill M. E., Garcia C., Garcia L. E. (2008). A developmental perspective on the role of motor skill competence in physical activity: An emergent relationship. Quest, 60(2), 290–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2008.10483582</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ulrich D. A. (2000). Test of gross motor development: Examiner's manual (2nd ed.). Pro-Ed.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ulrich D. A. (2018). Test of gross motor development (3rd ed.). Pro-Ed.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> World Health Organization. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). <ulink href="http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/">http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Chien-Yu Pan; Chia-Liang Tsai; Fu-Chen Chen; Chih-Chia Chen; Yu-Han Hu and Chia-Hua Chu</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref82"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1469367
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Effectiveness of a Fundamental Movement Skill Intervention in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chien-Yu+Pan%22">Chien-Yu Pan</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8113-5350">0000-0001-8113-5350</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chia-Liang+Tsai%22">Chia-Liang Tsai</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6173-2879">0000-0001-6173-2879</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Fu-Chen+Chen%22">Fu-Chen Chen</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chih-Chia+Chen%22">Chih-Chia Chen</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Yu-Han+Hu%22">Yu-Han Hu</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Chia-Hua+Chu%22">Chia-Hua Chu</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1598-8731">0000-0002-1598-8731</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Focus+on+Autism+and+Other+Developmental+Disabilities%22"><i>Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities</i></searchLink>. 2025 40(2):59-68.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 10
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Autism+Spectrum+Disorders%22">Autism Spectrum Disorders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Males%22">Males</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Children%22">Children</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychomotor+Skills%22">Psychomotor Skills</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intervention%22">Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Motor+Development%22">Motor Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Effectiveness%22">Program Effectiveness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Urban+Areas%22">Urban Areas</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Taiwan%22">Taiwan</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1177/10883576241311171
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1088-3576<br />1538-4829
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This study examined the effect of a 12-week fundamental movement skills (FMS) intervention on the motor skills of 20 boys with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (ages 3-10 years) in an Asian country and whether the intervention effect would persist for at least 12 weeks after the intervention. In Part I, 10 boys with ASD (Group 1) received the intervention, whereas the remaining 10 boys with ASD (Group 2) did not (true control, no intervention). The arrangement was reversed in Part II. The main findings were that children in both the ASD groups exhibited significant improvements in the overall gross motor development and the locomotor and object control subtest scores after the intervention. The effectiveness appeared to be sustained for at least 12 weeks in Group 1. The study findings indicate the importance of including FMS programming as a part of the early intervention services delivered to young children with ASD.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1469367
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1469367
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/10883576241311171
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 59
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Autism Spectrum Disorders
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Males
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Children
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Psychomotor Skills
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Intervention
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Motor Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Effectiveness
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Urban Areas
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Taiwan
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Effectiveness of a Fundamental Movement Skill Intervention in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chien-Yu Pan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chia-Liang Tsai
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Fu-Chen Chen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chih-Chia Chen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Yu-Han Hu
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Chia-Hua Chu
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 06
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1088-3576
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1538-4829
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 40
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities
              Type: main
ResultId 1