Effectiveness of cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance to improve shopping skills in children with learning disability
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Studies reports that children with learning disability were more dependent in shopping skills than typical children, and studies reports that shopping experience will promote cognitive and social development and understanding the sequences of events involved in shopping is clearly one of the most important aspects of transaction knowledge, there are many approaches to improve shopping skills. Hence, till date, the cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance (COOP) approach is not done in learning disability to improve shopping skills. Objectives: The aim and objectives of this study are to find out the effectiveness of COOP to improve the shopping skills in children with learning disability. Study Design: Two group pre- and post-test quasi-experimental design. Methods: Totally 30 children diagnosed with learning disability based on inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this study and children were divided into two groups 15 in experimental group and 15 in control group. Assessment tools such as Test of grocery shopping skills (TOGSS), Canadian occupational performance measure (COPM), and Performance quality rating scale (PQRS) were used as outcome measures. Experimental group underwent regular occupational therapy and COOP intervention and control group underwent regular occupational therapy and money handling skills training for 36 sessions within 12 weeks. Scores obtained were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: Statistical analysis using independent t-test of pre- and post-test scores of TOGSS where P = 0.001 (<0.05), COPM and PQRS where P = 0.001 (<0.05) shows significant improvement in shopping skills in learning disability children, Effect size of TOGSS, COPM, and PQRS were greater in the experimental group. Thus, finding of this study indicated that there was a significant improvement in experimental group when compared to control group. Conclusion: COOP approach showed significant improvement in shopping skills for learning disability children and children were satisfied with their performance. Thus, COOP approach is effective in improving shopping skills for learning disability children.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».