Recruitment, use, and satisfaction with a web platform supporting families of children with suspected or diagnosed developmental coordination disorder: a randomized feasibility trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives. To determine the feasibility of recruiting families of children with suspected or diagnosed developmental coordination disorder (sdDCD) and explore their satisfaction with a web-based interventionDesign. A feasibility randomized trial was conducted. Participants were the parents of 5–12-year-old children with sdDCD. The intervention group had access to online resources, group and private forums, and videoconferencing with a therapist. Main outcomes were recruitement and retention rates. Satisfaction was documented through a post-intervention survey and interview.Results. The recruitment rate was seven participants per month (n = 28 participants) and retention rate was 68%. Satisfaction was moderate. No differences in use and satisfaction were observed between groups. Participants formulated recommendations for improving the intervention, including targeting families earlier in the diagnosis process, and pre-scheduling meetings with therapists.Conclusions. This study demonstrated the feasibility of future trials, and highlighted avenues for improvement. Parent involvement during the development of the intervention is discussed at length.Abbreviations: DCD: Developmental Coordination Disorder; sdDCD: suspected or diagnosed Developmental Coordination Disorder; RCT: randomized-controled trial
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".