MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007647972 · doi:10.3109/17518423.2013.794166

Are you doing what you want to do? Leisure preferences of adolescents with cerebral palsy

2013· article· en· W2007647972 on OpenAlexafffund
Keiko Shikako‐Thomas, Michael Shevell, Lucyna Lach, Mary Law, Norbert Schmitz, Chantal Poulin, Annette Majnemer

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Neurorehabilitation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCerebral palsyPsychologyPreferencePsychological interventionDevelopmental psychologyRehabilitationLeisure activityPhysical activityClinical psychologyPhysical therapyMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at describing leisure activity preferences of adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP) and their relationship to participation and to identify factors associated with greater interest in particular leisure activities. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used. Participants were adolescents (n = 127; 59.5% male; ages 12-19 years old; mean = 15.3; SD = 2.01 years) with CP (GMFCS levels: I 40%, II 33%, III-IV 26%), who could complete the Preferences for Activities of Children (PAC) and other self-report questionnaires. RESULTS: Social (2.53; 0.38) and active-physical activities were most preferred (2.10; 0.42), and self-improvement activities were least preferred (1.93; 0.49). Preference for certain activities was not strongly associated with actual involvement in these activities. Family activity-orientation, family expressiveness, and adolescent's motivation explained 15% of the variance in preferences for social activities, and 37% of the variance in preferences for self-improvement activities. CONCLUSION: Family factors, personal factors, and functional abilities influence leisure preferences. Rehabilitation interventions should consider adolescents' preferences and family dynamics to promote leisure participation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations41
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental NeurorehabilitationSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207