Actual vs. best practices for young children with cerebral palsy: A survey of paediatric occupational therapists and physical therapists in Quebec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Cerebral palsy (CP) constitutes a substantial portion of paediatric rehabilitation, yet little is known regarding actual occupational therapy (OT) and physical therapy (PT) practices. This study describes OT and PT practices for young children with CP in Quebec, Canada. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey. All eligible, consenting paediatric occupational therapists (OTs) and physical therapists (PTs) were interviewed using a structured telephone interview based on vignettes of two typical children with CP at two age points--18 months and 4 years. Reported practices were grouped according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). RESULTS: 91.9% of PTs (n=62; 83.8% participation rate) and 67.1% of OTs (n=85; 91.4% participation rate) reported using at least one standardized paediatric assessment. OT and PT interventions focused primarily on impairments and primary function (such as gait function and activities of daily living). Both professions gave little attention to interventions related to play and recreation/leisure. Clinicians reported the need for more training and education specific to CP and to the use of research findings in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Wide variations and gaps were identified in clinicians' responses suggesting the need for a basic standard of OT and PT management as well as strategies to encourage knowledge dissemination regarding current best practice.
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".