ADHERENCE TO PRESCRIBED EXERCISE PROGRAMS IN JUVENILE ARTHRITIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with juvenile arthritis are often prescribed exercise programs to improve joint mobility, strengthen muscles and prevent deformities. Adherence to these programs is often low. PURPOSE To describe adherence to prescribed exercises in patients with juvenile arthritis, to determine whether the physical therapist's and parent's perceptions of adherence were associated and to describe factors associated with adherence. METHODS Parents of children who were prescribed exercise for their arthritis responded to a questionnaire addressing adherence. The treating physical therapist indicated their perception of the patient's adherence to treatment on a visual analog scale. Analysis consisted of correlations of adherence measures and linear regression to explore factors associated with adherence. RESULTS There were 75 children in the cohort who were prescribed exercises. 68% were female, mean age of the children was 10.6 years, and average duration of disease was 5 years. The correlation between parent reported adherence to exercise (mean of 45.2% on the visual analog scale) and physical therapist judged adherence (mean of 50.2%) was 0.2 (p = .3). There were moderate to high correlations between parent reported adherence to exercise and whether the parents considered the exercises to be helpful (0.5; p < 0.0001); and between parent reported level of child's difficulty in doing the exercises and any negative reactions to doing the exercises (0.7; p < 0.0001). Adherence was negatively correlated with the frequency of negative reactions (−0.3; p = .03) and with level of difficulty in doing the exercises (−0.3; p = .01). Higher adherence was associated with younger child's age, but not with disease severity, duration, gender or socioeconomic status. CONCLUSION Adherence to prescribed exercise in children with juvenile arthritis is moderate and is higher in younger children. Parent-reported adherence does not appear to be associated with therapist's perceptions of adherence. Strategies to improve adherence to prescribed exercise in older children should be considered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".