Cognitive Strategy Generation in Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Developmental coordination disorder (DCD) is a condition of impaired quality of movement and occupational performance. It has been hypothesized that the difficulties experienced by children with DCD may in part be due to an impaired ability to use cognitive strategies to solve occupational performance problems. Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) is a verbally-based approach to helping children remediate this difficulty. The current pilot study investigated the use of cognitive strategies in children with DCD to determine whether cognitive strategy use is improved by CO-OP. METHODS: Observations of video-recorded sessions of 18 school-aged children were scored for frequency and type of cognitive strategies used. RESULTS: Differences within and between groups revealed changes in the types and frequency of cognitive strategies. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The results of the present study support the use of a cognitively-based approach such as CO-OP in assisting children with DCD in developing cognitive strategies when solving occupational performance problems. However, further research using a larger sample is necessary to fully explore the impact of CO-OP on the strategy use of children with DCD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".