MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026163619 · doi:10.3109/09638288.2013.863391

Obesity prevention for children with physical disabilities: a scoping review of physical activity and nutrition interventions

2013· review· en· W2026163619 on OpenAlexafffund
Amy C. McPherson, Rebekah Keith, J. A. Swift

Bibliographic record

VenueDisability and Rehabilitation · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersBloorview Research InstituteHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital Foundation
KeywordsPsychological interventionObesityCerebral palsyInclusion (mineral)Weight managementMedicineWorkloadPsychologyGerontologyPhysical activityPhysical therapyClinical psychologyWeight lossPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Children with disabilities are at higher risk of obesity, engage in less physical activity and report poorer quality dietary habits than their non-disabled peers. This study reviewed current evidence on interventions designed to facilitate weight management and/or weight-related behaviors (i.e. physical activity and/or healthy eating habits) in children with physical disabilities. Methods: A scoping review was performed using established methodology. Data from studies meeting specific inclusion criteria were extracted and analyzed using summary statistics, and common characteristics thematically identified. Results: Thirty-four articles were included in the synthesis. No long-term obesity prevention interventions were identified. The majority of research focused upon children with cerebral palsy, and had case study, quasi- or non-experimental designs. All interventions reporting positive outcomes (n = 18) addressed physical activity, with common themes including using motivational strategies for the child and child self-direction. Incremental increases in workload and engaging in strength training for longer than 15 minutes were also effective. Interventions targeting body weight/composition did not report success in the long term. Conclusions: A robust evidence base is lacking for long-lasting obesity interventions for children with physical disabilities. Current research provides some insights into the specific components that should be considered when planning such interventions in the future. Implications for RehabilitationClinicians should be aware of the high risk of obesity, physical inactivity and poor diet in children with physical disabilities.The use of motivational strategies, child direction in activities and incremental increases in workload all appear promising approaches, yet require further evaluation.Evidence-based interventions are needed to improve both short- and long-term health and quality of life for children with physical 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations49
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDisability and RehabilitationSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207