Cognitive Orientation to (daily) Occupational Performance (CO‐OP) with children with Asperger's syndrome who have motor‐based occupational performance goals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Motor difficulties associated with Asperger's syndrome (AS) are commonly reported, despite these not being diagnostically significant. Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) is a verbal problem-solving intervention developed for use with children with developmental coordination disorder to address their motor-based difficulties. This paper reports on two case studies of children with AS illustrating the outcomes of CO-OP to address motor-based occupational performance goals. METHODS: A case study approach was used to document how two children with AS engaged in 10 weekly sessions of CO-OP addressing child-chosen motor-based occupational performance goals and the outcomes of this intervention. RESULTS: Pre and post-intervention assessment using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales and the Performance Quality Rating Scale indicated that both children were able to engage in CO-OP intervention to successfully improve their occupational performance. CONCLUSIONS: Further research into the application of CO-OP with children with AS is warranted based on preliminary positive findings regarding the efficacy of this intervention to address motor-based performance difficulties in two children with AS.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".