Goal-Orientated Group Intervention for Children with Developmental Coordination Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study measures the effectiveness of a goal-orientated group intervention using concentrated practice schedules for children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD). The study design is repeated measures. The sample comprises eight children with DCD, aged 7-11 years. Outcome measures are the Movement Assessment Battery for Children (MABC), the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Harter's Scale of Perceived Competence/Harter and Pike's Pictorial Scale of Perceived Competence, and clinical observations. The children set goals with the perceived efficacy and goal setting system with parents/caregivers input. The intervention used a goal-oriented approach combining motor learning and cognitive strategies consisting of eight 50-min sessions over 2 weeks. The results show significant improvements in the COPM and MABC scores following intervention but no changes in Harter's scores. Fifty-six goals were identified with 34 met totally, 12 met partially, and 10 remained unmet. A goal-oriented group intervention shows potential as an effective intervention method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".