MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023759396 · doi:10.1002/oti.202

The influence of virtual reality on playfulness in children with cerebral palsy: a pilot study

2004· article· en· W2023759396 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Therapy International · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsCentre for Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityPsychologyCerebral palsySession (web analytics)Intervention (counseling)Virtual Reality Exposure TherapyImmersion (mathematics)PleasureDevelopmental psychologyApplied psychologyHuman–computer interactionComputer sciencePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper was to examine the effects of virtual play intervention on the level of playfulness of children with cerebral palsy. Thirteen children aged 8-13 years comprised the study group. Children attended eight one-hour virtual reality play sessions in which they were immersed and interacted with virtual reality. The Test of Playfulness (TOP) was used as the measure to assess playfulness. Participants were videotaped while they played during 12 different environments over the course of their intervention time. Three randomly selected virtual reality play sessions were chosen to score three different virtual reality environments within each session yielding a total of nine trials (environments) for each participant. The types of virtual environments varied across participants. Overall, the different virtual reality play environments produced varying levels of playfulness according to the TOP's four different subscale scores. Motivation ranged from 1.50 to 2.25, internal control ranged from 1.00 to 1.88, suspension of reality ranged from 0 to 0.26, and framing ranged from 1.33 to 1.78. The three environments producing the highest playfulness ratings were called Paint, Trip and Island Sounds. These environments allowed creativity, persistence with the task, pleasure, and a certain degree of control. Two environments did not appear to foster playfulness. A possible reason was that these environments were too unpredictable and frustrating for participants. These results will be useful for creating new virtual reality software applications that will encourage playfulness in children with disabilities.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.289 · 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