MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729332514 · doi:10.1097/pep.0000000000000401

Commentary on “Ride-On Car Training for Behavioral Changes in Mobility and Socialization Among Young Children With Disabilities”

2017· letter· en· W2729332514 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ginny Paleg, Roslyn Livingstone

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Physical Therapy · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsSunny Hill Health Centre for Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)SocializationPsychological interventionSittingSession (web analytics)PsychologyRehabilitationApplied psychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineDevelopmental psychologyPhysical therapyComputer sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“How should I apply this information?” The importance of early intervention to promote development of sitting, reaching, hand use, and independent mobility has been stressed.1 Therapists working with infants and toddlers are encouraged to incorporate high-dosage, child-active interventions into practice.2 An adapted ride-on toy car intervention may represent just such an intervention. Case studies suggest beneficial effects on mobility and socialization as well as potential to impact overall development. Therapists should consider mobility training using a ride-on car either at a hospital, therapy, or other community setting if the home or child-care indoor environment or weather is not conducive. “What should I be mindful about when applying this information?” This study included children with good sitting abilities, who were able to use the switch independently 50% of the time from the first session. They did not have significant physical access limitations and already had established concepts of cause-effect. Children functioning at Gross Motor Function Classification System levels IV and V would likely require more adaptive seating and some may be more successful using switches with the head. Children with more complex disabilities may require more complex seating and switch mounting solutions that may be challenging for clinicians to implement. This remains a barrier to implementation of ride-on toy car modifications for clinicians working in community settings without rehabilitation engineering consultation or other technical support. This article makes a good case for implementing mobility training for infants and children with mobility impairments in a clinical setting. A 30- to 60-minute session may more typically be tolerated depending on the age of the child. There is a need for similar studies including larger numbers, more complex populations and either more rigorous single-subject or randomized controlled group designs. Ginny Paleg, PT, DScPT Montgomery County Infants and Toddlers Program Rockville, Maryland Roslyn Livingstone, OT, MSc(RS) Sunny Hill Health Centre for Children Vancouver, Canada

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Physical TherapySame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207