Functional Impact of Constraint Therapy and Bimanual Training in Children With Cerebral Palsy: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We compared children's self-care performance and caregivers' perception of children's performance on functional goals established for children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy (CP) after unimanual constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) or hand-arm bimanual intensive training (HABIT). METHOD: Sixteen children with CP were randomized to the CIMT or HABIT group. Interventions lasted for 15 days, 6 hr/day, totaling 90 hr. We used the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) to assess the children's daily functioning and mixed analyses of variance to compare group means on functional test scores before and after intervention. RESULTS: Both groups showed significant improvements on functional measures. Group × Assessment interaction in COPM performance revealed greater improvements for the HABIT group after intervention (p = .04). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that specificity of training exists only for performance of specific goals established by parents and that both CIMT and HABIT can be used to increase children's daily functioning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".