MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123353082 · doi:10.1111/cch.12026

Rehabilitation service utilization in children and youth with cerebral palsy

2013· review· en· W2123353082 on OpenAlex
Annette Majnemer, Keiko Shikako‐Thomas, Lucyna Lach, Michael Shevell, Mary Law, Norbert Schmitz, Chantal Poulin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueChild Care Health and Development · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsDouglas Mental Health University InstituteDouglas CollegeMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcMaster UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationShriners Hospitals for ChildrenCerebral Palsy International Research Foundation
KeywordsRehabilitationReceiptCerebral palsyPsychological interventionSpecial educationMedicinePsychologyClinical psychologyPhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To describe the pattern of use of rehabilitation services in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP), and to identify factors associated with use. METHODS: In this study, parents of 91 school-age children and 167 adolescents with CP completed a questionnaire regarding educational and rehabilitation resources received within the last 6 months. Rehabilitation services included occupational therapy (OT), physical therapy (PT), speech language pathology (SLP), psychology and special education. Demographic characteristics were documented and developmental and functional status was assessed. Relationships between service utilization and sociodemographic factors, functioning and school setting were determined. RESULTS: Over half of children (53.2%) and adolescents (57.5%) were in regular schools; however, 41% of these required special education resources. The remainder (42.5-46.8%) was in special schools. The majority of children (84.6%) were receiving at least one rehabilitation service although this decreased (68.1%) in adolescence. PT and OT were most common and services were provided predominantly in the school setting. Services were primarily weekly direct interventions at school age, with weekly interventions or consultations most common for adolescents. Younger age was associated with service receipt at school age only. Children with greater motor limitations, lower IQ and greater activity limitations were more likely to receive OT, PT, SLP or special education. Children in segregated schools were significantly more likely to receive rehabilitation services, when compared with children in regular schools. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of children and youth received one or more services. Individuals with greater motor or cognitive challenges were more likely to receive a range of school-based services from rehabilitation specialists. When compared with children of school age, adolescents were less likely to receive services and when provided, services were more likely to be consultative. Services may need to be more optimally organized through childhood to enhance benefits to children with CP across activity limitation profiles.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it