The effects of motivating interventions on rehabilitation outcomes in children and youth with acquired brain injuries: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the evidence of the effects of motivating rehabilitation interventions on outcomes in children with acquired brain injury (ABI). METHODS: A literature search of six databases was conducted to identify intervention studies published until July 2013. The American Academy for Cerebral Palsy and Developmental Medicine (AACPDM) systematic review methodology was used as a framework. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed level of evidence and quality of studies. RESULTS: Of 891 records initially retrieved, 166 were screened by abstract and 31 by full text; 10 studies comprised of five randomized controlled trials, two case series and three single subject research design studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies fell into three intervention categories: (1) token economy based interventions; (2) virtual reality (VR); and (3) memory and attention interventions. CONCLUSIONS: A paucity of evidence has examined the effects of rehabilitation interventions with a motivational component. Token economies can significantly enhance memory and response inhibition performance in children with ABI. VR systems are motivating, yet findings are limited by the lack of use and availability of psychometrically evaluated measures of motivation. Findings point to the need for further research to evaluate the effects of motivation-based interventions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.048 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".