Effectiveness of cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance to improve shopping skills in children with learning disability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Studies reports that children with learning disability were more dependent in shopping skills than typical children, and studies reports that shopping experience will promote cognitive and social development and understanding the sequences of events involved in shopping is clearly one of the most important aspects of transaction knowledge, there are many approaches to improve shopping skills. Hence, till date, the cognitive orientation to daily occupational performance (COOP) approach is not done in learning disability to improve shopping skills. Objectives: The aim and objectives of this study are to find out the effectiveness of COOP to improve the shopping skills in children with learning disability. Study Design: Two group pre- and post-test quasi-experimental design. Methods: Totally 30 children diagnosed with learning disability based on inclusion and exclusion criteria were included in this study and children were divided into two groups 15 in experimental group and 15 in control group. Assessment tools such as Test of grocery shopping skills (TOGSS), Canadian occupational performance measure (COPM), and Performance quality rating scale (PQRS) were used as outcome measures. Experimental group underwent regular occupational therapy and COOP intervention and control group underwent regular occupational therapy and money handling skills training for 36 sessions within 12 weeks. Scores obtained were subjected to statistical analysis. Results: Statistical analysis using independent t-test of pre- and post-test scores of TOGSS where P = 0.001 (<0.05), COPM and PQRS where P = 0.001 (<0.05) shows significant improvement in shopping skills in learning disability children, Effect size of TOGSS, COPM, and PQRS were greater in the experimental group. Thus, finding of this study indicated that there was a significant improvement in experimental group when compared to control group. Conclusion: COOP approach showed significant improvement in shopping skills for learning disability children and children were satisfied with their performance. Thus, COOP approach is effective in improving shopping skills for learning disability children.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".