A pilot single-blind multicentre randomized controlled trial to evaluate the potential benefits of computer-assisted arm rehabilitation gaming technology on the arm function of children with spastic cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential benefits of computer-assisted arm rehabilitation gaming technology on arm function of children with spastic cerebral palsy. DESIGN: A single-blind randomized controlled trial design. Power calculations indicated that 58 children would be required to demonstrate a clinically important difference. SETTING: Intervention was home-based; recruitment took place in regional spasticity clinics. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 15 children with cerebral palsy aged five to 12 years were recruited; eight to the device group. INTERVENTIONS: Both study groups received 'usual follow-up treatment' following spasticity treatment with botulinum toxin; the intervention group also received a rehabilitation gaming device. MAIN MEASURES: ABILHAND-kids and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure were performed by blinded assessors at baseline, six and 12 weeks. RESULTS: (2,15) = 6.778, p = 0.031), but this improvement did not reach minimal clinically important difference. Mean daily device use was seven minutes. Recruitment did not reach target owing to unanticipated staff shortages in clinical services. Feedback from children and their families indicated that the games were not sufficiently engaging to promote sufficient use that was likely to result in functional benefits. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that computer-assisted arm rehabilitation gaming does not benefit arm function, but a Type II error cannot be ruled out.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".