Effects of a Collaborative Intervention Process on Parent Empowerment and Child Performance: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To examine the effects of a four-step collaborative intervention process on parent and child outcomes and describe parents' and therapists' experiences. METHODS: Eighteen children with physical disabilities, their mothers, and 16 physical therapists participated. Therapists randomized to the experimental group were instructed in the collaborative intervention process. All family-therapist dyads participated in six weekly sessions. Outcomes included the adapted Family Empowerment Scale (FES) and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). A questionnaire was completed by parents and therapists to rate and describe their experiences. RESULTS: Mean scores on the FES (p <.05) and COPM (p <.001) increased after intervention but there were no group differences (p >.05). Effect size for change in child performance (.73) and parent satisfaction (1.08) on the COPM favored the experimental group. Parents in the experimental group were more confident in carrying out activities during daily routines (p =.01) and worked together with therapists to a greater extent (p =.01) than parents in the comparison group. Therapists in the experimental group perceived that they provided information/instruction (p <.01) and worked together with parents (p =.02) to a greater extent than therapists in the comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: Findings support the importance of shared goal setting for children's activities. Further research is recommended.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".