MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169951464 · doi:10.5014/ajot.62.3.282

Case Report: <i>ICF</i> -Level Changes in a Preschooler After Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy

2008· article· en· W2169951464 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Villares Martín, Patricia A. Burtner, Janet L. Poole, J. P. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Research Resources
KeywordsInternational Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthConstraint-induced movement therapySpastic hemiplegiaOccupational therapyPhysical therapyFunctional Independence MeasurePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyGross motor skillActivities of daily livingMedicineGrip strengthRehabilitationMotor skillCerebral palsyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors examined changes associated with constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) provided to a preschool-aged child with right spastic hemiplegia. This case study design used a 2-week pretest measure baseline period, 2 weeks of CIMT, and postmeasures at 1 week and 3 months. Measures were chosen to document changes at the different levels of International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), including the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI) Self-Care Section, Melbourne Assessment of Unilateral Upper Limb Function, and grip and pinch strength. Results showed increases on COPM-identified goals of increased independence with bilateral hand play and participation in gross motor play with friends. Changes were also documented in self-care, arm function, and grip strength. Another unexpected association reported by parents and professionals was increased speech intelligibility. Potential implications of implementing CIMT with young children are presented.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207