Associated movement reduction training for children with developmental coordination disorder: a pilot trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: Associated movements (AMs) are an indicator of poor movement quality, and are prevalent in children with motor impairment. The ability of children to inhibit AMs has been demonstrated in the hands, but the possibility of reducing AMs that involve both the upper and lower limbs has not been investigated. The aims of this study were to explore the possibility of reducing the AMs and to examine if the reduction of the AMs impacts on locomotion. Methods: An AM reduction intervention under stress gait conditions was piloted in nine children with developmental coordination disorder. A single-case alternating treatment design was used to evaluate the intervention effects of AM reduction training (experimental treatment) and strength training (control treatment) on the AMs under stress gait and running form, over a period of six months. Findings: Visual inspection of individual time-series plots from four children with intact data revealed a reduction of AMs, but the effect was temporary in two cases. The reduction of AMs did not coincide with the improvement of running form. Conclusions: This study highlighted the possibility of reducing AMs under stress gait, and indicated that the reduction of AMs did not improve the movement quality of running form.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".