The Move & PLAY Study: An Example of Comprehensive Rehabilitation Outcomes Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This perspective article provides an example of a study planned using guidelines for comprehensive rehabilitation outcomes research, an approach that is believed to give service providers meaningful evidence to support practice. This line of investigation has been guided by the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. The short title of a study under way is Move & PLAY (Movement and Participation in Life Activities of Young Children). The article briefly describes the conceptual model, provides guidelines on how indicators and measures are selected, alludes to the details of selected measures, and describes processes of preparing for data collection, including obtaining ethics approval, preparing data collection booklets, training assessors and interviewers, and sampling. The aim of this investigation is to gain a better understanding of the multiple child, family, and service factors associated with changes in mobility, self-care, and play of preschool children with cerebral palsy as a result of using this research method. Comprehensive rehabilitation outcomes research holds promise in providing evidence that supports the complexities of planning rehabilitation services with clients with chronic conditions, such as children with cerebral palsy.
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) | 0.000 | 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".