MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323025232 · doi:10.1177/1087054712468485

The Impact of a Motor-Cognitive Remediation Program on Attentional Functions of Preschoolers With ADHD Symptoms

2012· article· en· W2323025232 on OpenAlexaff
Nicole Chevalier, Véronique Parent, Mélanie Rouillard, France Simard, Marie‐Claude Guay, Claudia Verret

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Attention Disorders · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsHôpital Rivière-des-PrairiesUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionAttention deficitsExecutive functionsAttentional controlDevelopmental psychologyMotor imageryCognitive remediation therapyCognitive psychologyAudiologyPsychiatryElectroencephalographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of the motor-cognitive remediation program (MCRP) that uses sensorimotor and visual-motor imagery techniques on attentional functions in preschoolers with ADHD symptoms. METHOD: A total of 15 high-risk preschoolers were selected based on high ADHD symptoms. An experimental group participated in the MCRP and was compared with a control group. The MCRP consisted of 30 activities, 3 times a week, during 12 weeks. RESULTS: Children in the experimental group improved significantly for orienting (selective attention) and executive control (inhibition, stopping, and engaging mental operations) compared with the control group. CONCLUSION: These results are a first step to support the postulate that training specific attentional functions by sensorimotor activities and visual-motor imagery has an impact on the cognitive network of attention. This study suggests the potential value of MCRP addressed to preschoolers with ADHD symptoms.

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)0.001
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Attention DisordersSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207