IntroductionRemotely delivered treatment and research procedures were rapidly adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is unclear if these measures are valid. The purpose of this study was to compare the validity of anthropometry and motor skill proficiency measurements collected in a remote-setting to in-person setting among a sample of children ages 3–4 years.MethodsChild anthropometry and motor skill performance were measured in-person by trained assessors and by parents at home with remote supervision via videoconference by trained assessors. The following measures from the National Institutes of Health Toolbox were collected: anthropometry (height and weight), manual dexterity/manipulation (9-hole pegboard), motor coordination and agility (supine timed up and go), lower body strength (standing long jump), and postural stability (one-leg standing balance). Differences in expert and parent-based measurements were assessed using Bland-Altman plots, paired samples t-tests, and Pearson correlations.ResultsA total of n = 14 children completed the assessments. No significant differences were observed between measurement locations for weight and motor skills (p > .05). Remote measurement of height (M = 101.1 cm, SD = 5.40) was significantly greater than in-person measurements (M = 98.2 cm, SD = 5.16); p < .0001.DiscussionRemote measurements of motor skills and weight are valid assessments for researchers and clinicians to utilize in young children. Remote assessment with guidance offers comparable and valid estimates as in-person assessment, potentially offering a solution to resource-constricted barriers in research and access to care. There is an opportunity for researchers to fine-tune remote height and individual-level assessment strategies.