Exploring Issues of Participation Among Adolescents with Cerebral Palsy: What's Important to Them?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to determine what participation issues are important to adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP). Two hundred and three adolescents with CP (mean age 16.0 ± 1.8 years) were assessed using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). This was done through semistructured interviews by trained physical and occupational therapists. Adolescents responded either directly (n = 144) or through a parent or a caregiver (n = 59) if they were unable to communicate. Issues were extracted from completed questionnaires and coded under three COPM categories (self-care, productivity, and leisure) and 16 subcategories. There was no association between the total number of issues identified and gender (p = .99), age (p = .88), type of respondent (adolescents versus parent) (p = .27), Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) level (p = .93), or 66-item Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM-66) score (p = .45). The issues identified most frequently were related to active leisure (identified by 57% of participants), mobility (55%), school (48%), and socialization (44%). Interventions aimed at improving participation among adolescents with physical disabilities, such as CP, should be directed towards these four key areas. Health care professionals should also recognize and consider the interaction of person and environment when addressing issues related to participation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".