Measuring treatment outcome in children with developmental coordination disorder; responsiveness of six outcome measures
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Although measuring outcome of rehabilitation in children with Developmental Coordination Disorder is considered important no consensus exists on which instruments to use. An important attribute of a measurement instrument would be that it is sensitive to clinical changes. The aim of this prospective, observational study was therefore to investigate the responsiveness of six potentially suitable instruments. Forty-one children (34 boys, median age 7.8 years, Inter Quartile Range: 7.2–9.2) receiving multidisciplinary rehabilitation treatment for Developmental Coordination Disorder were included (mean treatment time: 32.8 h, Standard Deviation 7.3). The following instruments were applied before and after rehabilitation: Movement-Asessment-Battery-Children-2 (MABC-2), Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Systematic detection writing problems (SOS-2-NL), DCD-daily, Behaviour Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF), and TNO-AZL children’s Quality of Life questionnaire (TACQOL)). Change-scores (paired t-test/Wilcoxon-test) and responsiveness (Effect-sizes and Standardized-Response-Means) were calculated. Significant differences over time were found for the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, DCDdaily and Movement-Asessment-Battery-Children-2 (p Although the Movement-Asessment-Battery-Children-2 test is the most widely used instrument when measuring rehabilitation outcome in Developmental Coordination Disorder, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and DCDdaily seem to be more responsive and constitute a valuable addition.Implications for rehabilitationCurrently, there is no consensus on the preferred measurement instruments to evaluate the outcomes of rehabilitation in children with Developmental Coordination Disorder.The responsiveness of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was found to be large, of the DCDdaily moderate to large, and of the Movement-Assessment-Battery-Children-2 (MABC-2) small, whereas the systematic detection of writing problems (SOS-2-NL; Systematisch Opsporing Schrijfproblemen-2-NL), Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning (BRIEF) and TNO-AZL Questionnaire for Children’s Health-Related Quality of Life (TACQOL) were not responsive to change.Although the Movement-Assessment-Battery-Children-2 (MABC-2) is commonly used in Developmental Coordination Disorder rehabilitation, applying the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and DCDdaily should be considered, as these instruments were more sensitive to clinical changes. Currently, there is no consensus on the preferred measurement instruments to evaluate the outcomes of rehabilitation in children with Developmental Coordination Disorder. The responsiveness of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was found to be large, of the DCDdaily moderate to large, and of the Movement-Assessment-Battery-Children-2 (MABC-2) small, whereas the systematic detection of writing problems (SOS-2-NL; Systematisch Opsporing Schrijfproblemen-2-NL), Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning (BRIEF) and TNO-AZL Questionnaire for Children’s Health-Related Quality of Life (TACQOL) were not responsive to change. Although the Movement-Assessment-Battery-Children-2 (MABC-2) is commonly used in Developmental Coordination Disorder rehabilitation, applying the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and DCDdaily should be considered, as these instruments were more sensitive to clinical changes.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,028 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».