MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152721565 · doi:10.3109/01942638.2010.534125

Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia and Occupational Therapy: A Case Report

2010· article· en· W2152721565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Angela C. Bates

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational therapyMedicineCongenital diaphragmatic herniaIntervention (counseling)GastrostomyPhysical therapyPediatricsSurgeryNursingPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This case report describes occupational therapy (OT) intervention in an outpatient setting and outcomes for a child diagnosed with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) from 4 to 28 months of age. There is little information on therapy intervention and outcomes of children who have survived. The patient is a white male, born at 35 weeks gestation with a diagnosis of left CDH that required a patch repair. He also had a Nissen fundoplication, gastrostomy tube and spent the first 100 days of his life in the hospital. He received outpatient OT for 2 years. The process of service provision is described using the "Occupational therapy practice framework: Domain and process, 2nd edition" (American Occupational Therapy Association, 2008 , American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62(6), 625-683). The focus of intervention, description of the intervention process, and timeline for achievement of skills is provided. Outcomes and assessment tools used included the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-Second Edition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0070.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In PediatricsSame topicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia StudiesFrench-language works237,207