Protocol for <i>N</i> -of-1 trials with replications across therapists for childhood-onset dystonia rehabilitation: Study 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, no evidence-based rehabilitation interventions are available for hyperkinetic movement disorders (HMD), including dyskinetic cerebral palsy (CP). Among these highly heterogeneous disorders, dystonia is the predominant disorder. The Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP) Approach-a task-oriented, performance-based intervention to enable participation-is currently being evaluated for its potential as an intervention option. PURPOSE: This paper reports the protocol for the second of two studies designed to evaluate the potential of CO-OP to improve functional outcomes for individuals with HMD following deep brain stimulation (DBS). This second study is a systematic replication across multiple treating therapists from multiple centres. METHOD: Systematic replications will be used across centres and treating therapists trained in the CO-OP, using a series of randomized multiple-baseline N-of-1 trials. Participants will be ages 6 to 21 years with HMD and DBS as indicated by the Manual Ability Classification System. Data collection will involve multiple data points collected at baseline, during intervention, and after intervention. The intervention will involve occupation-based goal setting followed by 10 individualized CO-OP sessions. The primary outcome measures are the Performance Quality Rating Scale and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Outcome data will be plotted over time for each participant and supplemented with graph statistical analysis and estimate size effect for N-of-1 trials. IMPLICATIONS: The results of this study will help to inform future training procedures and future clinical trials.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.087 | 0.143 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.026 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".