Retrospective Analysis of an Ongoing Group-Based Modified Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Program for Children with Acquired Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: A pretest-posttest retrospective design was used to evaluate the impact of a group-based modified constraint-induced movement therapy (mCIMT) program on upper extremity function and occupational performance. METHODS: 20 children ages 3 to 18 years with hemiplegia following an acquired brain injury participated in a 2-week group mCIMT program. Upper extremity function was measured with the Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA) and subtests from the Quality of Upper Extremity Skills Test (QUEST). Occupational performance and satisfaction were assessed using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Data were analyzed using a Wilcoxon signed-ranks test. RESULTS: Group-based analysis revealed upper extremity function and occupational performance attained statistically significant improvements from pre- to postintervention on all outcome measures (AHA: Z = -3.63, p = <.001; QUEST Grasps: Z = -3.10, p = .002; QUEST Dissociated Movement: Z = -2.51, p = .012; COPM Performance: Z = -3.64, p = <.001; COPM Satisfaction: Z = -3.64, p = <.001). Across individuals, clinically significant improvements were found in 65% of participants' AHA scores. 80% of COPM Performance scores and 70% of COPM Satisfaction scores demonstrated clinically significant improvements in at least one identified goal. CONCLUSIONS: This study is an initial step in evaluating and providing preliminary evidence supporting the effectiveness of a group-based mCIMT program for children with hemiplegia following an acquired brain injury.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".