MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1598717643 · doi:10.1002/oti.321

The Pirate Group Intervention Protocol: Description and a Case Report of a Modified Constraint‐induced Movement Therapy Combined with Bimanual Training for Young Children with Unilateral Spastic Cerebral Palsy

2011· article· en· W1598717643 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pauline Aarts, Margo van Hartingsveldt, Patricia G. Anderson, Ingrid van den Tillaar, Jan van der Burg, Alexander C. H. Geurts

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Therapy International · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGoal Attainment ScalingConstraint-induced movement therapyCerebral palsyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationIntervention (counseling)PsychologyRehabilitationProtocol (science)Task (project management)SpasticGeneralizationUpper limbSpastic hemiplegiaPhysical therapyMotor skillDevelopmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this article was to describe a child-friendly modified constraint-induced movement therapy protocol that is combined with goal-directed task-specific bimanual training (mCIMT-BiT). This detailed description elucidates the approach and supports various research reports. This protocol is used in a Pirate play group setting and aims to extend bimanual skills in play and self-care activities for children with cerebral palsy and unilateral spastic paresis of the upper limb. To illustrate the content and course of treatment and its effect, a case report of a two-year-old boy is presented. After the eight-week mCIMT-BiT intervention, the child improved the capacity of his affected arm and hand in both quantitative and qualitative terms and his bimanual performance in daily life as assessed by the Assisting Hand Assessment, ABILHAND-Kids, Video Observations Aarts and Aarts Module Determine Developmental Disregard, Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and Goal Attainment Scaling. It is argued that improvement of affected upper-limb capacity in a test situation may be achieved and retained relatively easily, but it may take a lot more training to stabilize the results and automate motor control of the upper limb. Future studies with groups of children should elaborate on these intensity and generalization issues.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOccupational Therapy InternationalSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207