MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2173581253 · doi:10.1111/dmcn.12966

Efficacy of three therapy approaches in preschool children with cerebral palsy: a randomized controlled trial

2015· article· en· W2173581253 on OpenAlexaff
Anne J. A. Kruijsen-Terpstra, Marjolijn Ketelaar, Olaf Verschuren, Jan Willem Gorter, Rimke C. Vos, Johannes Verheijden, Marian J. Jongmans, Anne Visser‐Meily

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Medicine & Child Neurology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersStichting Rotterdams Kinderrevalidatie Fonds AdriaanstichtingUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenZonMw
KeywordsCerebral palsyContext (archaeology)Randomized controlled trialPhysical therapyOccupational therapyMedicineRehabilitationGross Motor Function Classification SystemConfidence intervalPediatricsPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To examine the efficacy of child-focused, context-focused, and regular care approaches, delivered in a rehabilitation setting by physical or occupational therapists to preschool children with cerebral palsy (CP), in optimizing the child's self-care and mobility capabilities. METHOD: A multicentre randomized controlled trial clustered at therapist level was conducted in 13 rehabilitation centres. It included 68 children with CP (38 males, 30 females; mean age 3y, SD 6mo, range 1y 11mo-4y), classified as Gross Motor Function Classification System levels I to IV, who were already receiving therapy. Children received a child-focused, context-focused, or regular care approach during a 6-month period. Self-care and mobility capabilities were assessed with the Functional Skills Scale of the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory. RESULTS: The child-focused, context-focused, and regular care approaches all resulted in significant but similar improvements in self-care (regular: reference; child-focused: β=-0.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.68 to 0.46; context-focused: β=0.13, CI -0.38 to 0.64) and mobility (regular: reference; child-focused: β=-0.09, CI=-0.93 to 0.75; and context-focused: β=0.14, CI -0.65 to 0.94) capabilities. INTERPRETATION: The results suggest that the three therapy approaches were equally efficacious for preschool children with CP. Depending on a child's individual situation each approach can be selected.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental Medicine & Child NeurologySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207